2009

Magazine Section

List

EDUCATIONAL VISIT TO THE COMMONWEALTH JUDICIAL EDUCATION INSTITUTE, HALIFAX, CANADA (8-28 JUNE, 2008) 

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AND SUO MOTO

STANDING TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF TRADITIONAL AND ISLAMIC BANKING

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN CITIZENS AND THEIR COURTS

WHEN CONSTITUTION IS INEFFECTIVE

HUDOOD ORDINANCE AND GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN PAKISTAN: IMPEDIMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS

PERSONAL INJURY AND LIABILITY OF A CARRIER

FLAWS IN PUNJAB RENTED PREMISES ORDINANCE, 2007

KHULA: THE GREAT CONTROVERSY

INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: IMPLEMENTATION IN PAKISTAN

COVENANT IMPOSING TAZIR ON PRONOUNCING DIVORCE VOID

CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDYS AND
 EXHAUSTION DOCTRINE


ENVIRONMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS

GREEN LAWS IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

FATA: CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES

SOVEREIGNTY OR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION: THE DECISIVE DECISION

PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING WRIT JURISDICTION

HUDOOD ORDINANCE AND GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN PAKISTAN: IMPEDIMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS

DISTRICT JUDICIARY: TRUE PERSPECTIVE

TRADED REMEDY LAWS OF PAKISTAN UNDER THE WTO REGIME

PRINCIPLES OF POLICY OF CONSTITUTION
 OF 1973 AND THEIR OBSERVANCE


JUSTICE DELAYED - JUSTICE DENIED

RIGHT TO HOLD PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT IN PAKISTAN RAILWAYS

-------------------------

EDUCATIONAL VISIT TO THE COMMONWEALTH JUDICIAL EDUCATION INSTITUTE, HALIFAX, CANADA (8-28 JUNE, 2008)

Some Observations and Suggestions

By
MUHAMMAD AMIR MUNIR, Fellow CJEI
(Civil Judge 1st Class / Magistrate s.30)
Additional Director (Academics)
Federal Judicial Academy, Islamabad

The Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute (CJEI) annually organizes a three week Intensive Study Program (ISP) for Judicial Educators from around the Commonwealth countries. For their program scheduled for 8-28 June, 2008, Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan nominated two hon’ble judges from superior courts, i.e., Mr. Justice M. Javed Buttar, Judge Supreme Court and Mrs. Justice Qaiser Iqbal, Judge, High Court of Sindh; while I was nominated to represent the Federal Judicial Academy. Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) was kind enough to sponsor the study program for Pakistani delegation.  There were 25 participants from different commonwealth countries. Some of them were judges of superior courts, some were civil judges and magistrates and court administrators while some were judicial educators / faculty members of judicial training institutes and academies.  It was a mix of cultures and backgrounds.

Hon’ble Sir Dennis Byron, President of International Criminal Tribunal for Rawanda (ICTR) is President of the CJEI. Likewise, a former Canadian Judge, Hon’ble Sandra E. Oxner is Chairperson of the Institute. Further details about the Institute and its workings can be read at www.cjei.org. It is housed in Dalhousie University that is located in a very beautiful seashore city Halifax. This city is famous for having a museum wherein remains of unfortunate-mega-ship Titanic are kept. It has also graves of many of the dead of the Titanic, which are buried in graves that make shape of the ship. It has many other attractions like sea shore, port, gardens, war related army buildings, and many other beautiful old and new buildings. We stayed in a hotel which was very near to Titanic museum and seashore. The Institute and University were also very near to the hotel.

The study program was designed not only to cater the academic needs of the participants, but it was full of other recreational activities like yoga sessions and visits to different parts of cities. The first two weeks were in Halifax for educational and academic study while the last week was for visits to different judicial, legislative, executive and administrative institutions situated in capital city Ottawa and mega city of Toronto. Briefings were arranged for the participants regarding these institutions. The most important of the institutions/places which we visited were the Supreme Court of Canada where its Registrar briefed the participants on workings of the Supreme Court; the Parliament of Canada that has a beautiful and attractive building and Niagra Falls, a must see natural heritage at the US and Canada border. We also enjoyed the ride of Maid of the Mist, the famous boat that takes the visitors in the mist created by the water fall. Before departing from Halifax for Ottawa, a visit to Governor House of Nova Scotia Province was arranged where participants met with the Governor of Nova Scotia. She welcomed all the participants and appreciated much the role CJEI is playing in dissemination of latest knowledge on judicial education around the commonwealth countries.

The study also included visits to the National Judicial Institute that caters the need of training and education of Canadian judiciary; Canadian Judicial Council that hears complaints about judges and perform the role to recommend the names of fit persons to be appointed to different judicial offices and Office of the Federal Judicial Affairs that is generally meant for playing the role of a bridge and buffer zone between the executive and legislative branches of government. A visit and a session on alternative dispute resolution methods used in Ottawa’s Court of Justice was arranged. It was fantastic to know the details on ADR from the judge of a Court who is running successfully the ADR court under a well defined program for resolution of disputes through compulsory mediation.

The participants of ISP also visited the Ontario Court of Justice in Toronto––the biggest province of Canada. We met with its Chief Justice on a luncheon hosted by her in her beautiful office located in a multi-story building in Toronto. We were informed that it is a rented office. We also visited the three innovative courts that work under the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. These are called Problem Solving Courts which work to bring out some social outcome of problems instead of legal outcome for the litigants. They mostly deal with mental health cases; juvenile cases and aboriginals’ cases.

In the first two weeks of the ISP, the participants of the program received training on different issues that relate to the core area of judicial education and training. The international best practices on judicial education were discussed and techniques were told. It was also discussed in different sessions that how a judicial academy is to be organized and how its curriculum can be defined. Sessions were also arranged on training of trainers and different teaching tools that are required to run a judicial education/training institute in a most modern way. The foremost among them were: adult education principles; presentation techniques; communication skills; program designing for judicial education and training programs; preparation of calendars for judicial training programs including short and long term programs; use of modern technology for judicial education; session on use of power-point; judicial training and education through use of audio/video and internet.

            The first judicial training institute in Pakistan, the Federal Judicial Academy, was established in 1988 through a Resolution of Government of Pakistan. This Academy was given statutory cover in 1997 when the Federal Judicial Academy Act, 1997 was passed.  In 1993, the first provincial judicial training and education institute was created in Sindh, i.e., the Sindh Judicial Academy at Karachi, first through an Ordinance and then through an act of the provincial assembly. Balochistan and NWFP have established their own judicial training institutes under direct control and supervision of their respective high courts. However, these are not statutory institutes. Punjab government also established, in 2007, the Punjab Judicial Academy through statutory instrument, i.e., the Punjab Judicial Academy Act, 2007. Northern Areas and Azad Jammu and Kashmir have no training institutions for their judicial officers or court staff. Federal Judicial Academy invites judicial officers from these two areas to meet their requirement of judicial training and education. The Sharia Academy of the International Islamic University, Islamabad also train judicial officers and law officers on various Islamic laws and concepts.

            It shows that the concept of judicial education and training has firmly established not only at federal level, but even at the provincial levels. We have now six institutions in Pakistan that are specifically meant for training of judges, magistrates, law officers and court personnel. It is important that these institutions learn the best practices of judicial education and training through active participation in regional and international training programs for judicial educators organized by well recognized judicial training and education institutes working at regional or international levels. Most important of them are the CJEI in Halifax, Canada and International Organization of Judicial Trainers (IOJT) based in Supreme Court of Philippines in Manila. The judicial training bodies in Pakistan may send their nominees to these institutions for attending their training programs and different conferences and seminars so that our judicial trainers / faculty members can build their capacity to work in most modern way of imparting judicial training and education.

            The Chairperson of CJEI, Judge Sandra Oxner has been visiting Pakistan and remained in contact with FJA for development of its curriculum. Provincial judicial academies may request CJEI to provide technical assistance for designing and implementing of an effective judicial education strategy. Already, there are 15 CJEI Fellows in Pakistan who have attended CJEI Intensive Study Program in the past. Judicial academies may contact with them to provide fresh inputs for improvements in judicial education and training programs. These persons can also be invited as resource persons for training of trainers and also for training the trainee officers. Their list is available at the website of the CJEI mentioned above.

            In total, the ISP of the CJEI is an effective training program for judicial educators where they learn how to impart judicial education and how to run judicial training institutes and programs. I would suggest to the directors-general of all our judicial academies that every year some of the funds must be allocated for training of trainers program for judicial educators / faculty members of the academies so that the academies may remain relevant and uptodate on judicial education needs of the society.  For any further information about CJEI or its programs, author may be contacted at amir.munir@fja.gov.pk.

-------------------------------

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AND SUO MOTO

By:
JAVWAD TARIQ NASIM
(Advocate High Court)
(L.L.B Honours, University of London)
(L.L.M in International and Commercial Law, University of Buckingham, UK)

Judicial Activism:

The concept of judicial activism was created and introduced by "Arthur Schlesinger Jr." (an American historian and social critic) to the public in a Fortune magazine article in January 1947.[1]

For an informal definition one can phrase out Judicial Activism as being the process or concept in a judicial system that justifies making decisions which are contrary to established precedents and laws, whether statutory or constitutional. Such decisions are applauded by the general public rather than juristic philosophers and writers.

Numerous legal and non-legal sources have attempted to define the word and have done so successfully in various different expressions. Some of the good sources need to be quoted here as follows:

"A philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions, usu. with the suggestion that adherents of this philosophy tend to find constitutional violations and are willing to ignore precedent."[2]

The term "Judicial activism" is different from the term "An Activist judge" and should not be confused to mean the same because the former relates to the definitions and concepts defined above while the latter may be referring to a judge who has not literally overturned an established rule or principle but has just given an important judgement/decision on an important law point. Important decisions on points of law even though not in conflict with established laws will be an activist decision by an activist judge. Thereby meaning that the progress of the judiciary is also linked to the term "activism".

The concept of judicial activism especially to laymen is more of a "protector of individual rights" rather than a concept of "restraining constituional violations even if it involves ignoring precedents" even though both concepts are one of a kind when it comes to their effect in their application.

The Debate - Arguing For and Against Judicial Activism:

It is difficult to say whether the concept of judicial activism has made more critics of itself or supporters but in the view of its critics of `the application of the concept usurps power of the legislature, thereby diminishing the rule of law and democracy'. The main objection with the concept is that in the view of its critics, the Courts (Judiciary) are established to rule upon (uphold) the rules and legislation drafted by the legislature and not to check the validity of the legislation. The duly elected participants/members of the parliament have the sole authority to make laws and the courts are only a forum that would interpret them and decide whether someone is following it or deviating from it. The supporters of the concept of "separation of powers" also argue along the same line by arguing that the three organs of the state i.e. the Legislature, the Executives and the Judiciary should operate individually and independently rather than stepping onto the jurisdiction of the other organs of the state.

However on the other hand the people who have defended judicial activism argue that it is the duty of the court and the court should take upon itself to guarantee the rights of individuals against the powerful hands of the few powerful people in the society. Laws that are inconsistent with fundamental rights should be declared to be void with no effect no matter how much loss the legislature has borne in introducing that illegal law. It is the view of the supporters of the concept that it is also the job of the courts to uphold the rights of the minority no matter what political pressures the court faces in making that decision. The country has to be "socially equal" in everyway to achieve full democracy. It cannot make double standards as to its own policy making and the courts should be there to watch that such double standards have not arisen between the general public and the government.

Another critic of the concept is the present Chief Justice of America, John Roberts who has condemned the concept of `judicial activism' in the following words;

"Judges are like umpires. Umpires don't make the rules; they apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire."

Furthermore the Chief Justice has stated that `the courts are not under a commission or mission to solve the society's problems'. The courts in his view are only the adjudicators upon fact and law and they should responsibly do only the duty of interpreting law.

An example of a U.S case that involved important judicial activism is quoted as follows:

Dred Scott vs. Sandford[3]

This case also known as the "Dred Scott Decision", was a lawsuit, pivotal in the history of the United States, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1857 that ruled that people of African descent, whether or not they were slaves, could never be citizens of the United States, and that Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories. The decision for the court was written by the then Chief Justice of Amercia, Roger Taney. The implications of the decision are not under discussion because the important point to note here is that the Court took upon itself to lay down the law as opposed to interpreting it which is the primary duty of the Judiciary.

Judicial Activism in Pakistan:

Judicial activism in Pakistan is becoming a norm rather than an exception. The judiciary in Pakistan has assumed the role of upholding the constitutional rights of the citizens of Pakistan themselves, ensuring that the fundamental rights of the public are not being infringed by the powerful political parties at their whim.

One of the various modes in which judicial activism is practiced or is entrusted upon the courts to practice is through the concept of "Public Interest Litigation" (hereinafter referred to as "PLI"). The main appellate Court which is the court of last resort is the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Supreme Court has been involved in historical problems which have frequently changed the level of judicial activism in Pakistan but the soaring level at which it has been for the past few years has never been witnessed before.

Pakistani courts have been involved in judicial activism since a long time back and one of the examples of such activism can be witnessed from the 1988, Saifullah's case. Despite the strong pressure by the executives, it was made mandatory that elections would be held on party basis. Later, the Lahore High Court and the Supreme Court both declared that the government of "Junejo" was dissolved unconstitutionally. The matter came down to an interpretation of Article 17 of the Constitution and by taking a very dynamic interpretation of Article 17 of the Constitution, the Nawaz Sharif government was restored in 1993. Had the Supreme Court interpreted the article literally, the case should have been heard by a High Court at first instance.

Therefore it is evident that the Pakistani courts have been involved in judicial activism since a long time back whether it is activism in relation to political affairs or activism for the protection of individual rights and the upholding of the rule of law.

The recent example of the "clash" between the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and the President of Pakistan, can be attributed to Judicial Activism in Pakistan. Prior to the tussle between the two, the Chief Justice of Pakistan ("CJP") had been taking various harsh actions against several governmental authorities/bodies under the shield of Suo Moto. When the decisions of the CJP became agonizing for the President and his reign, he removed the CJP in one day by exercising the so-called powers of the President in the mistaken capacity of the Chief of Army Staff.

Suo Moto:

The concept of suo moto (in the context of Pakistan) can be defined as an inherent right of the Supreme Court and High Court of Pakistan to take cognizance of any act/omission of any public functionary in order to check the legality and more often, the legitimacy of any action of that public functionary. Anything under the sun can come under the notice of the two Apex courts of Pakistan.

In Pakistan the courts have gradually developed this doctrine and are acting upon it on a day to day basis whenever they get a chance. In other words a special tool named Suo Moto has been created by the Pakistani courts to legitimize the taboo of "Judicial Activism". The two terms "Suo Moto" and "Judicial Activism" are different concepts and are not interchangeable with each other; in fact the former is a part of the latter. Suo Moto can contribute to judicial activism but there are various other methods by which judicial activism can take place.

Suo moto has reached the status of an "inherent right" in Pakistan, in other words it means that it is perfectly legitimate for the Judiciary (High Court and Supreme Court) to interfere in the domain of other organs of the state. This in turn means that the doctrine of "Separation of Powers" is directly in conflict with the doctrine of Suo Moto.

Conclusion

While concluding this discussion on Judicial Activism and Suo Moto, it is necessary to evaluate the public perception of judicial activism in Pakistan. For the general public in Pakistan, suo moto action has been a divine revelation, something that can be equated to a blessing. The poor and suppressed community being the majority of the community in Pakistan is in strong favour of the doctrine of suo moto. The current CJP has taken numerous decisions behind the facet of suo moto jurisdiction including decisions on the enforcement of human rights and on cases such as the `missing persons' cases.

One of the manifold reasons for the success of the concept of Suo Moto is that it is effortlessly accessible to the poor (which is the majority class in the country) so for the poor and needy only a simple hand written "letter" can initiate proceedings in the highest court of Pakistan. The people who cannot even imagine affording the towering fees of big named attorney's can simply request the CJP through a letter about any malpractice of a governmental authority and the CJP (especially the ex-CJP) would be more than willing to cure the defects by ordering the needful.

In this way suo moto action is a blessing for those who have been victimized by the might of governmental authorities. Moreover another positive effect of the suo moto action is that the governmental authorities in order to save themselves the embarrassment of being called inefficient or ultra vires through court try to restrain themselves into doing acts which are within its legal sphere.

The new concept may be a violation of the rule of separation of powers but the question then arises, do we actually need a concept such as "separation of powers"? Is the legislature and executive doing anything according to the rules of natural justice so that the citizens and the organs (which are made up of the citizens themselves) are totally honest with the country? Instead of making the situation worse, the judiciary is helping the country in developing integrity and responsibility towards citizens, guaranteeing the enforcement of their fundamental rights and constitutional rights as promised in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

A developed country like the U.S which only requires checks and balances for its smooth running can afford to apply and abide by such a doctrine but where a country like Pakistan is being dictated by the military for the past 10 years, it is better for someone to take upon him/her self the responsibility of providing justice and who else is better equipped or legally capable to provide justice other than a Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan?

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Pakistan regarding the holding of two posts simultaneously by the President i.e. the posts of Chief of Army Staff and the President of Pakistan has taken the general public by surprise (the Supreme Court has held with a majority of 6-3 in favour of the President that he can legally hold the two concerned posts at the same time) because the intensity and frequency of judicially active decisions since the past few months had created a strong belief in the general public's mind that the current President would not be allowed to keep both posts simultaneously.

Is this decision a product of judicial activism as well or has the government used its sticks against the judiciary to calm its activism down?  No  matter  what  explanations  the  Supreme  Court  gives  in  its

detailed order, the language of Article 63 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is clear and unambiguous. It clearly lays down that a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (the Parliament) cannot be a person who has been in the Civil Services of Pakistan or has acted and worked in a post which is controlled or owned by the government.

This decision can also be viewed as judicial activism by the judges by ignoring the express prohibition in Article 63 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan but this time the judicial activism was in favour of one man at the expense of a nation built up of millions of people.

A final verdict upon whether judicial activism is favorable or not can be concluded in making a statement that such activism is favorable for a third world country like Pakistan where justice and equality is not at arms length for the poor. Judicial activism has helped societies all over the world in developing their laws, however such activism should be checked and balanced so that the judiciary does not become the legislature and the interpreter of law. The role of the judiciary is to interpret the law as laid down by the legislature and in doing so it should keep in mind the intention of the legislature as well as the benefits and detriments of the final decision upon the society. Last but not the least, the actions and activism of the judiciary should replicate the needs of the society and any action taken on behalf of the public should be for the benefit of the public as a whole as opposed to the recent decision of the Supreme Court regarding the holding of two posts simultaneously by the President, which is on the face of it tainted with only one person's personal interests.

----------------------

STANDING TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW

By
MISS ATIKA LOHANI*

            All developed legal systems have had to face the problem of adjusting conflicts between two aspects of the public interest. The desirability of encouraging individual citizens to participate actively in the enforcement of the law, and the undesirability of encouraging the professional litigants and the meddlesome interloper to invoke the jurisdiction of the courts in matters that do not concern him.[4] How serious this conflict actually is, is open to question. As Professor K.E.Scott has written in his Article “Standing in the Supreme Court-A functional analysis”,[5] that “The idle and whimsical plaintiff, a dilettante who litigates for a lark, is a spectre which haunts the legal literature, not the courtroom.” The conflict has been resolved by developing principles which determine who is entitled to bring proceedings; who has locus standi.[6]

Locus is a term used in geometry with the meanings suggested by the Latine “Locus” “Place”. The term is readily extended to higher dimensions,[7] and also refers to “the place where thing is done or exists”.[8]  “Locus standi” is “a place of standing; standing in court,”[9] right to bring an action or to be heard in a given forum; standing[10] or standing to bring proceedings.

The expression “standing” is defined as “A Party’s right to make a legal claim or seek judicial enforcement of a duty or right.”[11] Brennan,J.  in Baker v. Carr[12] is quoted here while he gave the basic concept of “standing” in that “Have the appellants alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends for illumination of difficult constitutional question.? This is the gist of the question of standing.” It is appurtenant to quote Joseph Vinning here, while he says: “the word standing is rather recent in the Basic Judicial vocabulary and does not appear to have been commonly used until the middle of our own century. No authority that I have found introduces the term with proper explanations and apologises and announces that hence forth “standing” should be used to describe who may be heard by a Judge.”[13]

In the absence of standing, or locus standi, the court has no jurisdiction to exercise its supervisory power over the impugned action of a public body. How issues of standing are decided determines who has access to justice and it, therefore, has a constitutional significance. At its heart is the question that “are there some decisions of public bodies, the legality of which is otherwise justiciable, but in respect of which no person has been sufficiently affected to enable a legal challenge to be made”? to answer yes to this question presupposes that the primary function of the court’s supervisory jurisdiction is to redress individual grievances, rather than that judicial review, which is concerned with rule of law.[14]

The English common law has dealt harshly with those who maintain others to institute civil proceedings in which they themselves have no direct interest: Culpa est se immiscere rei ad se non pertinent.[15] when an administrative body commits a breach of the law which is, neither a tort nor a crime, a difficult problem of public policy arises. If a public authority makes regulations or issues orders or spends money for unauthorized purposes, or if an administrative tribunal usurps a jurisdiction that does not belong to it, or if either refuses to discharge its statutory duties, the matter is obviously one of public importance; but it is not obvious that every member of the public should be entitled to vindicate the law by instituting legal proceedings. It would be unwise to assume that the effort of the doctrine of binding precedent or the power for the courts to award penal costs against vexatious litigants would suffice to dam a flood of unmeritorious challenges to administrative action.[16] According to a survey carried out by L. Brideges, M. Sunkin and G. Me-sza-ros, in the book “Judicial Review in perspective”[17] recorded an interesting analysis of applicants for judicial review. According to analysis applications were made in 84-88 percent of cases by individuals; of the remainder 50-60 percent are by companies, 6 percent by central Government, 14-35 percent by local authorities and only 1-2 percent by non governmental organizations.

Nearly all foreign systems have required that, save in exceptional cases; a plaintiff must have a special personal interest in the proceedings which he institutes. In Roman law it was open to any citizen to bring an actio popularis in respect of a public delict or to sue for a prohibitory or restitutory interdict for the protection of res sacrae and res Publicae, but title to sue otherwise depended upon the infringement of a private right. In French and Italian  administrative law administrative action can be impugned only by those who have a direct personal interest; the range of interests that provide  locus standi is considerably wider in France than in Italy. In United States, too, petitioner must establish a “personal interest” ; the case-law is voluminous, and the courts have exercised wide discretion in determining whether the petitioner’s interest is one deserving of legal protection.  As it was decided by the Court that “Where the party does not rely on any specific statute authorizing invocation of the judicial process, the question of standing depends upon whether the party has alleged such a ‘personal stake in the outcome of the controversy’, as to ensure that ‘the dispute sought to be adjudicated will be presented in an adverse context and in a form historically viewed as capable of judicial resolution”.[18]In English Law, parliament has provided a statutory procedure for challenging the validity of administrative actions, it has usually restricted locus standi to “persons aggrieved.”[19]

English law, included for the first time a statutory test of standing of general application, and the jurisdictional requirement of a sufficient interest” for an applicant to apply for a judicial review is stipulated by section 31(3) of the Supreme Court Act, 1981, and in almost identical terms by R.S.C., Ord.53, and rule 3. These provisions refer expressly to the court refusing permission or leave unless it considers that the applicant has standing.[20] One of the objects of the new test was to save the courts from having to reconcile the multiplicity of often conflicting authorities which governed the principles of Locus Standi under the previous procedure for obtaining the prerogative orders.

In America ”injury in fact test” and “zone of interest test” are introduced to streamline the question of standing faced by the courts in a number of cases. The ‘injury in fact’ test requires more than an injury to a cognizable interest. It requires that the party seeking review be himself among the injured.[21] In Data Processing Service case[22] the Supreme Court of America held more broadly that persons had standing to obtain judicial review of federal agency action under section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act 1946 [23] where they had alleged that the challenged action had caused them ‘injury in fact ‘and where the alleged injury was to an interest arguably within the ‘zone of interests’ to be protected or regulated by the statutes that the agencies were claimed to have violated.

The question of standing in Pakistan has been raised before the courts where ever the dimensions of “aggrieved person” were sought to be prescribed by the courts before excercising the Constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of 1973.            In Shahnwaz Begum v. the Honourable Judges of the High Court of Sindh[24]. It was laid down that “High Court has no power to issue suo motu an order under this Article, its jurisdiction to do so being dependant on application of an aggrieved party.” “Aggrieved” in general is defined as having suffered loss or injury.”[25]. It may be stated generally, that an aggrieved party is one; in prohibition whose rights are threatened, in mandamus whose rights are being denied and in certiorari whose rights have been affected by decision. The word “right” is not used in its strict juristic sense. It is sufficient if the person alleging to be aggrieved has a personal interest in the performance of a legal duty which if not performed would result in the loss of some personal advantage[26]. A party who stands to loose or gain an advantage by observance or non observance of law is an aggrieved party[27]. In Managing Committee v. Settlement Commissioner[28] it was decided that it is a basic principle that a petitioner does not have a standing to sue unless he is interested in it and adversely affected by the decision of which he seeks review and his interest must be of a personal and not of an official nature.” Therefore a commission agent is not competent to apply on behalf of his principle[29]; nor can a person who himself does not pay a toll tax ask for a prohibition against the levy of any such tax[30], nor a person who asserts a right to which he is not entitled[31].

During the 19th century the words ‘person aggrieved’ were construed very restrictively. The extension of the concept of standing in England can be traced back to 1880, in Side Botham case[32] where Nathan Side Botham and James Marsh, who carried on business in partnership at Ashton-under-Lyne as the Barnfeild Ironworks Company, were adjudicated bankrupts in Ashton country court on 21st November of 1973. In Chancery Division, a distinguished Judge, Lord Justice James, refused to act on report by comptroller in Bankruptcy of misfeasance of trustee. It was laid down at page 465 that a man was not a ‘person aggrieved’ unless he himself had suffered particular loss in that he had been injuriously affected in his money or property rights. He was not ‘aggrieved’ simply because he had a grievance.

            But in 1957, Lord Justice Parker and Lord Denning M.R., departed from this old test. Lord Denning in his book “The Discipline of Law’ mentioned that “ a case which is only reported in the local Government Reports i.e. R. v. Thames Magistrates’s Court (1957)5 LGR 129. It was about a pitch in a street market in Bermondsey. The magistrate had awarded the pitch to a seller of jellied eels. But a newspaper seller thought that he ought to have had the pitch. He had no legal right to the pitch. But we held that he had a locus standi and quashed the order of magistrates.[33] This was followed a few years latter in R. v. Paddington Valuation Officer, ex parte Peachy Property Corporation Ltd.[34] where a ratepayer who said that the valuation list of the whole area had not been properly prepared. He was not able to show that his own property was rated wrongly. His only complaint was that the whole list was wrong. Lord Denning M.R. said on page 400-1 that “The question is whether the peachy Property Corporation are “persons aggrieved” so as to be entitled to ask for certiorari or mandamus. It was contended that the matter would not make a pennyworth of difference to them. But I do not think grievances are to be measured in pounds, shillings and pence court would not listen of course; to  a mere busy body. But it will listen to anyone whose interests are affected by what has been done. So here it will listen to any ratepayer who complains that the list is invalid”.

Again in R. v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, ex parte Blackburn,[35] Mr. Blackburn came just as a private citizen. He had no greater interest than any other member of the public and approached the court for the law be enforced. It was submitted that he had no locus standi. Lord Denning observed the question whether Mr.Blackburn has a sufficient interest to be protected, and said that “No doubt any person who was adversely affected by the action of commissioner in making a mistaken policy decision would have such an interest.”

This principle was accepted as correct in another important case brought by Mr.Backburn R. v. Police Commissioner, ex parte Blackburn[36] is an important illustration of the principle, where it was sought that the laws against pornography were not being enforced. Mr.Blackburn had no interest except that his children might see the publications –just as anyone else’s children.

The matter of sufficiency of interest came up for debate again in 1976, in case, R. v. GLC, ex parte Blackburn,[37] where it was brought to the knowledge of the court that pornographic films were being exhibited in London, and the Greater London Council were doing nothing to stop them. The application for writ of prohibition was succeeded. Lord Denning observed “On this point, I would ask: who then can bring proceedings when a public authority is guilty of a misuse of power? Mr.Blackburn is a citizen of London, his wife is a ratepayer. He has children who may be harmed by the exhibition of pornographic films. If he has no sufficient interest, no other citizen has”.

Lord Denning quoted his findings in McWhilter’s case (1973) QB 629, 649 which reads as under “I regard it as a matter of High Constitutional principle that if there is a good ground for supposing that a government department or a public authority is transgressing the law, or is about to transgress it, in a way which offends or injures thousands of Her Majesty’s subjects, then anyone of those offended or injured, can draw it to the attention of the courts of law and seek to have the law enforced.” The Blackburn cases extended locus standi for the prerogative writs, but not for the remedies by declaration or injunction. This principle laid down by Lord Denning did not find favour with the House of Lords. They disapproved it in the Gouriet  v. Union of Post Office Workers[38] on a very narrow ground it was because of remedy which was sought other wise, Mr.McWhirter should have sufficient interest to bring certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition, because undoubtedly, independent television authority was a statutory authority against whom any of the prerogative writs could lie. This anomaly has, however, been removed by the new rules of Court and high Constitutional principle restored in its entirety.As stated earlier, English law, included for the first time a statutory test of standing of general application and the jurisdictional requirement of a “sufficient interest” for an applicant to apply for a judicial review is stipulated by section 31(3) of the Supreme Court Act, 1981, and almost identical terms by R.S.C. ordinance. 53 rule 3.[39] Lord Denning wrote in “The Discipline of Law” regarding introduction of order 53 in January 1978 that “it lays down one simple test of locus standi in order 53, Rule 3(5). It is this the applicant must have a sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates, what is the test of “sufficient interest”? The Rules committee has not attempted a definition but I would suggest that it is legitimate to adopt the test laid down in the Blackburn and McWhirter cases. The court will not listen to a busybody who is interfering in things which do not concern him, but it will listen to an ordinary citizen who comes asking that the law should be declared and enforced, even though he is only one of hundred, or thousands who are affected by it.[40]

The application of the sufficiency of interest test must be seen in the light of the first important decision by the House of Lords on this topic, namely R. v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, exp. National Federation of Self-employed and Small Businesses Ltd.,[41] where casual labour was common on Fleet Street newspapers, the workers often adopting fictitious names and paying no taxes. The IRC made a deal with the relevant unions, workers and employers whereby if the casuals would fill in tax returns for the previous two years then the period prior to that would be forgotten. The National Federation argued that this bargain was ultra vires the IRC and sought a Declaration to that effect plus mandamus to compel the IRC to collect the back taxes. The IRC defended by arguing that the National Federation had not standing. Their Lordships found for the IRC but it would be misleading to say that they upheld the entirety of the IRC’s claim.The effect of the decision is happily described by Sir William Wade Q.C. and C.F. Forsyth in “Administrative Law[42] as helping “to crystallize the elements of generous and public oriented doctrine of standing which previously been sporadic and uncoordinated.” Lord Wilberforce at page 631 of IRC case observed that Gouriet and the IRC case, in fact, reflect different philosophies. The IRC case eschewed the historical distinction between the remedies, and took as its touchstone the more liberal rules for prerogative relief, to which standing for Declaration and injunction were then assimilated.

The general thrust of the IRC case was that the standing and the merits often could not be separated in complex cases where it would be necessary to consider the whole legal and factual context to determine whether an applicant possessed a sufficient interest. The term merits have meant that the court would look to the substance of the allegation in order to determine whether the applicant had standing. This would include:

1.                   the nature of the power or duties involved;

2.                   the alleged breach; and the subject matter of the claim.

            According to P.P. Craig, the term fusion will be sued to refer to the process whereby courts consider the above list of factors in order to determine whether the applicant has standing in this particular case.[43]

To visualize the extended application of standing to public policy it is pertinent to mention that in Pakistan the concept of aggrieved person was, for the first time, introduced as a rule of law, in the Article 98 of Constitution of Pakistan 1962, although courts have applied it as rule of prudence while they exercised the Constitutional jurisdiction under Articles 223-A and 170 of 1935, Act and 1956 Constitution respectively. So the writ jurisdiction u/A 98, of 1962 Constitution could only be exercised by an aggrieved person. The High Court  could not issue any writ suo motu. The exercise of writ jurisdiction was dependent on the application of aggrieved person. He could establish his locus standi by showing that he had a direct personal interest in the act in respect of which he was approaching the court for relief in exercise of its extra ordinary Constitutional jurisdiction, under this Article.

            Article 199 of 1973 Constitution also like its predecessor Article 98, stipulated that the High Court may pass such an order on the application of a person who approaches the High Court if he is an aggrieved person in terms of Article 199. It was interpreted in Fazal Din v Lahore Improvement Trust[44]  by Supreme Court  that “it is enough for the applicant to disclose that he had a personal interest in the performance of the legal duty which if not performed or performed in manner not permitted by law would result in the loss of some personal benefit or advantage or curtailment of a privilege or liberty or franchise. “ In a latter case, Begum Nair Abdul Hamid v. Pakistan (Federal Government) Through the Secretary, Interior, Division Islamabad,[45]  Lahore High Court held that if a right of husband was infringed, the mater could be agitated by his wife before the High court. Relying on Fazal Din’s Case, it was decided that”if the movements of husband are restricted in house it is, of course not possible for him to perform his obligation if wife’s state of health calls for an immediate removal to hospital. This no doubt, will affect the right and interest of the wife and she be an aggrieved person within the meaning of sub clause (a) of clause (I) of Article 199, it is not necessary that she must establish right in strict juristic sense.”

The court in Pakistan has for the firs time introduced the concept of Fusion ( i.e. to decide upon the sufficient interest the legal and factual context of the case should be appreciated) in Aslam Saleemi, Advocate v the Pakistan Television Corporation[46] where the petitioner was an advocate and also an office bearer of a political party, this was one of the parties of a Political Alliance. The grievance of the petitioner was that Pakistan Television Corporation was being used by the government party for election campaign. The party of political alliance to whom the petitioner belonged was not being allowed to avail the same facility. The Lahore High Court observed that the meaning of the expression “aggrieved party” in Article 199 has to be construed in the context of and on the facts of each case”, which observation is in line with view of Lord Wilberforce expressed in IRC case in 1982.

Extended meanings assigned to the expression aggrieved person are also laid down in Miss Benazir Bhutto v Federation of Pakistan[47]. Where objection was taken that the rights which could be enforced by the court must ordinarily be the rights of the petitioner himself who claims infractions of those rights, and approaches the court for relief, the objection was, however, overruled, and at page 483, Honorable Mohammad Haleem C.J., while relying on Fazal Din’s Case observed that “It is clear that the vires of Act can be challenged if its provisions are ex facie discriminatory, in which case actual proof of discriminatory treatment is not required to be shown.This being so, it can not be doubted that the petitioner is an aggrieved party as contended by the learned counsel to the petitioner.” However the preponderant view, appears to be that person in order to qualify as an aggrieved person may not have a right in strict juristic sense, but he can nevertheless maintain a writ if his interest are prejudicially affected.”[48]

            In the case of Dr. Mahboob v Mrs. Nawab Begum (1992) it was observed  that “Construction of high rise building can cause nuisance to the neighbors or persons living in the same locality can object on the ground supporting infrastructure; and the residents of the locality can object on the ground that the proposed building would interfere with their amenities. So in the present case, deprivation of any amenity would confer a right on the residents of the locality to maintain a writ petition.”

            The effect of reading Article 199 (1) (c) and Article 199 (2) together is that the meaning of a aggrieved person has been enlarged and relaxed. The restrictions of pre-conditions which may be found in Article 199 (1) do not find any mention in sub Article (2) of Article 199 where the enforcement of Fundamental Rights is concerned, therefore, it deserved specific meaning and construction by the High Court. Sindh High Court held in Sindh Graduates Association v the State Bank of Pakistan[49]that“The second clause of Article 199 of the Constitution enables a High Court   to give effect to the guarantee assured by Article 8 (1) of the Constitution. Right to move the High Court for infringement of any of the Fundamental Rights can not be abridged or curtailed in any manner. Locus standi in such cases still cover wider range. In view of above we are inclined to hold that petition filed by the petitioners is maintainable.” In Ghulam Mustafa v Muniapal Corporation (1998) Lahore High Court observed that “Liberal interpretation of term “aggrieved person” must be adopted if it was found that issues involved in particular case were of paramount public importance or the same related to management of fiscal affairs of statutory body or of government department dealing with public exchequer. Narrower or technical approach in such matters to non-suit any citizen would be infringement of spirit as well as fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, which could not be allowed to be abridged, or curtailed.”

With the attitude to extend the concept of standing to public policy in a proper case to help redress the grievance the courts have considered the dimensions as well, to limit the extension where ever it is in greater benefit of justice to deny the standing than to adhere to the flexible approach thereof. In order to discover who may be legitimately responsible for the institution of an action for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition, as the case may be, and to see what persons have right to apply, the primary aspect to be dealt with is, whether writ is issuing as a matter of right or according to the discretion of court.  Regardless the question of who the person aggrieved is, English courts have refused to grant writ of certiorari, even where grounds were made out for its issuance, if no benefit could arise from granting it, thus in R. v. Newborough[50] where allowances were paid under informal and probably void order and applicant would be unable to recover the money even if order made so, Lush  J. observed that “It is in the discretion of the court to grant or to refuse a certiorari, and it is not a matter of right. As the order had acted on, the money paid, and the account allowed, we think we ought not to do anything to re-open these proceedings”.

Again in Supreme Court ruling in case of Rahmatullah v. Mst. Hameeda Begum[51] we can see the inclination of the courts in the same fashion as it read that “Even when an order impugned before High Court is found to be lacking in some legal, or jurisdictional requirement the Constitutional provision does not compel the High Court to issue a writ much less that of certiorari or mandamus. If the result is that by setting aside such an order another order would be revived which is unjust or unfair or is otherwise also illegal, then before setting aside first mentioned order the court will have to examine more carefully the question of exercise of discretion and in proper cases would decline to exercise discretion, provided that the setting aside of such an order would result, inter alia into an injustice or revive another illegal order.” In Dr. Zahida Mir v. the Punjab Public Service Commission, Lahore[52] it was laid down that substantial justice has been done to both the parties, it is not a fit case for the exercise of discretionary Constitutional Jurisdiction to disturb entire selection process and remit the case to the commission, this Discretionary relief is also denied to a person where it amounts to help him in retention of ill-gotten gains.[53] The discussion may be further streamlined by adding D.C.M. YardLey, who opined in his article “Certiorari and the problems of locus standi[54]  and “Prohibition and Mandamus,  the Problem of Locus Standi[55]that “The judicial talk of “persons aggrieved” is only a loose covering by the courts for this general policy of allowing an applicant to obtain a rule if it is desirable. The court is in fact simply exercising its discretion whenever it decides who is or who is not a person aggrieved.”

So where a person who has suffered a legal wrong or a legal injury or whose legal right or legally protected interest is violated, is unable to approach the Court on account of some disability or it is not practicable for him to move the Court for some other sufficient reasons, such as his socially or economically disadvantaged position, some other person can invoke assistance of the Court for the purpose of providing judicial redress to the person wronged or injured, so that the legal wrong or injury caused to such person does not go unredressed and justice is done to him. Take for example, the case of a minor. So in this context surrogate standing covers the case where a pressure group represents the interests of others who are often not well-placed to bring the action themselves. Associational standing is typified by an organization which is suing on behalf of its members. Standing has been accorded in such circumstances where the group consists of persons who are directly affected by the disputed decision. There can equally be cases where one member of a group brings the action on behalf of the group as whole, as in Mohammad Aslam Saleemi v. Pakistan Television Corporation[56]. Public interest standing is asserted by those claiming to represent the wider public interest, rather than merely that of a group with an identifiable member-ship. In this type of case, the decision may affect the public generally, or a section thereof, but no one particular individual has any more immediate interest than any other, and a group seeks to contest the matter before the courts. Some claims of this nature have failed, but a number have succeeded. A well-known claim which failed was R. v. Secretary of State for the Environment, ex.p. Rose Theatre Trust Co.[57] Developers, who had planning permission for an office block, came upon the remains of an important Elizabethan theatre. A number of people formed a company seeking to preserve the remains. They sought to persuade the Secretary of State to include the site in the list of the monuments under the Ancient Monuments and Archeological Areas Act 1979. The Secretary of State could do so if the site appeared to him to be of national importance. If the site was thus designated, that it was of national importance, no work could be done without his consent. Although the Secretary of State agreed that the site was of national importance. He declined to include it within the relevant legislation. Schiemann J. found that there had in fact been no illegality, but he also held that the applicants had no locus standi. He accepted that a direct financial or legal interest was not necessary in order for an applicant to have standing; the assertion of an interest by many people did not mean that they actually possessed one; and that there might be certain types of governmental action which no one could challenge. In other cases, public interest challenges have been successful. In R. v. Secretary of State for Employment, ex P. Equal Opportunities Commission[58] the EOC sought locus standi and argued that certain rules concerning entitlement to redundancy pay and protection from unfair dismissal were discriminatory and in breach of E.C. law. The House of Lords held that the EOC did have standing. In R. v. Her Majesty’s Inspector of Population ex P. Green Peace Ltd[59]. applicant group brought a challenge to the regulation of the Sellafied nuclear site. Otton J.  reached his conclusion by taking a number of factors into account, including the fact that Greenpeace was a respected international organization with a large membership; that a number of its members lived in the Cumbria region; that the issues were serious and complex; that Greenpeace was well-placed to argue them; and that if it did not have standing there might not be any effective way to bring the matter before the court. A liberal attitude towards public interest challenges is also apparent in the Word Development Movement case.[60]  The WDM sought to challenge the minister’s decision to grant aid to fund the construction of the Pergau dam in Malaysia on the ground that it was outside the relevant statutory powers. The court accorded the group standing, taking into account the fact that no other challenger was likely to come forward, and the importance of vindicating the rule of law by ensuring that the minister remained within his statutory powers.    The fusion approach has been used to varying degrees in the context of group challenges.

A close scrutiny of authorities shows that Superior Courts in Pakistan have been inclined to give liberalized and more uniform meanings to “Aggrieved Person” under Article 199 of Constitution of 1973. A person who has a genuine grievance on account of an action which affects him prejudicially is ordinarily considered to be eligible to move the court. So in administration of Justice, High Court came to rescue aggrieved citizen and ordered in nature of mandamus to SHO’s of various police stations to lodge an FIR and proceed with investigation,[61] where refusal on their part was alleged. While in 1999, a leading case on this point Ardeshir Cowasjee v. Karachi Building Control Authority (KMC) Karachi[62] gave the more uniform and extensive meanings to the concept of Aggrieved person and streamlined the law in Pakistan on the subject, with the approach adopted in English Law recently. In this case where order of Constitution of High rise building was challenged.  Honourable Cheif Justice Ajmal Mian recorded the judgment and quoted a treatise (judicial review of Administrative Actions by de Smith, Woolf and Jowell 5th ed.) where the general approach to concept of Locus Standi in the context of “Sufficient Interest” is summarized and held that “the concept of Locus Standi has been whittled down inasmuch as the expression “sufficient interest” inter alia includes civic (or community) environmental and cultural interest.” However Lahore High Court in a later case of Mohammad Suleman v. Additional Deputy Commissioner (General) Lahore, Cantt.[63] Insisted on fundamental and legal rights of an individual, petitions were maintained and held that “a person could be said to be aggrieved when a person was denied a legal right by some one who has legal duty to person relating to that right.” The following year, Lahore High Court considered a blacklisted firm as an aggrieved person who failed to comply with contractual obligations in stipulated period, which was due to non availability of the material in market, and recognized grievance in respect of reputation. So in Zulfiqar Ali v. Divisional Superintendent (workshop) Pakistan Railways, Mughalpura, Lahore[64] Honourable Syed Zahid Hussain J., observed that” where an act or order inflicted civil consequence on a person in respect of his reputation or property which was harmful to interest of that person, he was, before authority takes such decision of blacklisting him, the person likely to be affected adversely, and was entitled to a notice and hearing in matter” and set aside the alleged decision. In recent case, Pakistan Lawyers Forum v. Federation of Pakistan[65] the Lahore High Court was keeping in view the progressive and liberal meanings of expression “aggrieved person” whereby the court accepted a Registered body of Lawyers as competent to file writ petition. In this case, Implementation of the Judgment of Supreme Court in Zafar Ali Shah case (PLD2000 S.C.869) was sought; court recognized the petitioner as aggrieved person but declined to dwell upon such points lest it trespassed on jurisdiction of Supreme Court. The learned Council for petitioner, Mr. A.K. Dogar, relied upon Miss Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1988 S.C. 416) and Al Jehad Trust v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1999 S.C. 324) to support his argument that petitioner has locus standi, the court observed that “the petitioner is a registered body of lawyers, who are the Honorable citizens of this country, groomed in law and Constitution have every right to assail Legal Framework Ordinance. In order that a person be considered an “aggrieved person’ within the meaning of Art. 199, he may not have a right in strict juristic sense but he must show that he had a personal interest in the Constitution, would affect entire nation and petitioner is body of lawyers who are citizens of this country and likely to be affected by amendment.” In Lahore High Court in Mist. Rukhsana v. D.S. P. Circle Sadikabal[66] where the petition is one of the many petitions filed almost daily in this Court by women, who leave their homes and contract marriages against the wishes of their families and then seek protection against an unreal danger of threat which might not exist at all, the petition has been submitted to prevent any legal action to be taken against her by her family. The purpose of filling such petitions is two-fold: firstly it is intended to bring on record a particular version of the abductees and second, of course, is to prevent a likely or impending legal action to be taken against the abductees or others. The objectives stands achieved by the petitioner, while there is no proof of any harassment being caused to petitioner by the police Honourable Intikhar Hussain Held that “in case the local police initiated any action against the petitioner, the police shall ensure that every thing is done strictly in accordance with law and petitioner is not subjected to harassment at the wishes of any individuals.” But the scope of Article 199 of the Constitution 1973, particularly in the cases of writs of habeas corpus has been narrowed down by the recent decisions of the Superior Court, and it is reflected in one of the case of Javed Ibrahim Paracha[67]. The said petitioner was a former member of National Assembly from Kohat District, NWFP who filed a Constitution Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution challenging illegal arrest and detention of some 57 foreigners mainly from Arab countries and 145 Pakistani citizens mainly from tribal areas. This writ petition was dismissed by Peshawar High Court mainly on the grounds, inter alia, that the petitioner was not an aggrieved party. Strangely, the Supreme Court of Pakistan also adopted the same view and dismissed the appeal against the decision of the Peshawar High Court, inter alia, on the grounds that the petitioner was not an aggrieved party and that such petition does not amount to a public interest litigation. This decision was given contrary to the settled law in respect of “aggrieved person” in the matters of writ of habeas corpus and ignoring the rule laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Begum Nusrat Bhutto.[68] Reliance was placed on the case of Manzoor Illahi[69].

To sum up this discussion, observations of Lord Diplock at page 644 in IRC case would be more valuable and discernible fact where he said “it would  in  my  view,  be  a  grave  lacuna in  our system of public law if a

unauthorised/illegal termination of the same. Further, in the cases of minor, mentally ill and unmarried women, if one gets pregnant for any reason (apart from application of criminal law--if it entails any punishment) it must be kept ‘confidential’ between the family of the ‘patient/victim pregnant woman and the staff of an authorised medical hospital, as it is being practised in UK and India because disclosure of the same can create irresolvable problems for the aggrieved family and society at large.

 Moreover, the ambiguity in law regarding stages of pregnancy should be clarified in definite terms of weeks or days on the basis of available scientific research and it should be obligatory for incumbent doctors of an authorised hospital to perform an abortion when it is not opposed to law and the conditions compel the same, to protect the life and health of the pregnant woman. Meanwhile, the acts of medical officers done in good faith should be expressly protected. The term “necessary treatment” needs to be redefined on the line of Indian term “grave injury”. Whereas, the term “physical and mental health” also demands sympathetic rehabilitation, it should include something like Indian explanations to section 3.[70] Certain more grounds for the termination of pregnancy should be provided to avoid confusion pertaining to the cases of rape, incest, foetal defects, future of existing child, and foreseeable environment of the potential child.

-----------------------

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF TRADITIONAL AND ISLAMIC BANKING

By
Aamir Abbas,
Govt College University Sargodha

Introduction

This paper is an attempt to highlight the practices of traditional banking system comparing it with Islamic one. This is an exploratory study of existing practices of banks in money, capital and credit markets where interest based borrowing and lending, though repugnant to Islamic injunctions, is supposed to be the blood vessels for economic survival of homo sapiens.

Comparative Economic Philosophies

The societal fabric of human being solicits different socio economic setups and consequently, each society envisions economic system different to other societies Economic system is an integrated way of production, consumption and distribution or how the state should allocate resources among different factors of production. This integrated system is guided by particular economic system, which a society prefers to practice. This trend resulted in three different economic systems, present in the world. These are capitalism, socialism and Islamic economic systems. Each has its own guidelines for production, consumption and distribution of resources.

 In capitalism, ownership lies with the individual and individual has absolute power on his property. He may use his wealth in a way he likes irrespective of how it creates disorder. This nature of wealth is evident from saying of nation of Hazrat Shoaib (A.S)

“Does your way of prayer commands you that we should forsake what our forefathers worshipped or leave off doing what we want with our own property” (11:87)

This verse reveals that people who reject faith think that they can do any thing what they want to do with their property

In socialism, ownership lies with the state and state has absolute power on use and distribution of wealth among various factors of production.

But in Islam, ownership lies with Allah and man acts as agent of Allah and can use the wealth under the commandments of Allah. Quran has authenticated this by

“And give to them from property of Allah, which He has bestowed upon you” (24:33)

It is clear from above verse that all what a man possesses has been given to him by Allah and therefore, man has restricted or conditional power on use of wealth. Secondly, man does not have unconditional power. Thirdly, purpose of human being is not only to make profit, as it is in materialism, and enhance living standards. From Islamic perspective, this universe is a trial of man as Quran says that

“And know that your possessions and your children are but a trial for you” ()

And Allah clearly dictates man on how to utilize the wealth. Quran Says that

“Seek the other world by means of what Allah has bestowed upon you and do not be negligent about your share in this world and do good as Allah has done good with you and do not seek to create disorder on the earth” (28:77)

This verse provides comprehensive guideline on concept of ownership, purpose of human being and nature of power from Islamic perspectives. Firstly, this verse reveals that purpose is to seek the other world. Secondly, what does a man has, has been bestowed upon him by Allah. And thirdly, man cannot use his wealth in a way that is likely to create disorder on the earth as last part of above verse interdicts the unjust use of wealth.

Interpretation of Riba

The term Riba derives its meanings from Quran

“O those, who believe fear Allah and give up what is still due to you from interest, if you are true believers” (2:278)

Thus Riba is any excess compensation without any consideration. There are two types of Riba. One is Riba Al Nasiyah and the second is Riba Al Fadl. The first type has been prohibited by Quran and is predetermined excess on capital while the second, has been prohibited by Prophet (PBUH) and it results from sale of goods. Islam does not prohibit the excess on capital. It only interdicts the predetermined excess on capital as is practiced in traditional deposit and credit markets.

In 17th century, two new types of Riba appeared. Some Muslims, who were looking the speed at which West was making tremendous progress in the field of economics, science and technology on one side and shattering economic conditions of Muslim states on the other side, argued that commercial interest is not prohibited in Islam. It is only usury (sarfi sood), which is prohibited in Quran. They presented two arguments.

Argument#1

Riba that was in practice at time of Prophet (PBUH) was only usury

Counter Argument

When Islam prohibits some thing, it does not prohibit its one form that is currently prevalent, it prohibits all types, which may erupt in future. For example, Quran has prohibited liquor, khinzeer and corruption. The process of making liquor today is totally different from what it was at the time of Prophet (SAW) but ruling remains same. Similarly, how pure and clean breeding of khinzeer is today, it remains haram. Same ruling applies to gambling and interest too. Commercial interest in one type of riba and is haram.

Argument#2

Commercial interest did not exist at the time of Prophet (SAW) and is therefore acceptable in Islam.

Counter Argument

From many examples, it has been proved that commercial interest was in practice at the time of Prophet (SAW). At the advent of Islam, tribe of Mughairah owed a huge amount of interest to tribe of Umro bin Aamir. Both of these tribes were trading partners and are thus very rich. To assume that loan between these two tribes was usury would be very weak argument as both were rich and loan was simply for investment purpose and resultant interest was commercial interest. Secondly, Hazrat Abbas and Hazrat Khalid Bin Waleed made a joint company that used to give loan on interest. Taif was second to Makkah in the field of trade and Jews tribe “Sakeef“ used to give loan on interest to Mughairah that was their main customer in Makkah. All these examples clearly prove that commercial interest was in practice and Islam has also prohibited commercials interest. Secondly, according to Hadees narrated by Abu Hurrairah, Prophet (SAW) said that Mokhabara is haram and should be avoided. Mokhabara has more similarities with commercial interest instead of usury.

Therefore, to argue that current interest based system falls under the category of Bai is not reasonable. There are two types of trade as mentioned in Surah Al Baqra. First type is Bai and second type is riba. In this verse, Allah differentiated between bai and riba and permitted bai but prohibited riba

Nomenclature does not make any difference. Calling pig by the name of chicken does not make it hallal. Ruling stands still and pig is haram. Same rule applies to riba. If nature remains same, profit rate fixation remains same; changing the name from interest-based system to profit and loss sharing system does not make it acceptable. Therefore, while arguing for halal and haram, one thing must be kept in mind that Islam does not say that there is no benefit of haram things. It interdicts things whose harms to society are more than their benefits.

References

  1. Ahmad, Ausaf (1993), Contemporary Practices of Islamic Financing Techniques, Research Paper No. 20, Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah.

  2. Al-Gari, M. Ali (2001), “Credit Risks in Islamic Banks' Finance”, IRTI-HIBFS Seminar on Regulation and Supervision of Islamic Banks: Current Status and Prospective Development held in Khartoum April 2001

  3. Al-Jarhi, Mabid Ali, (2001), “Enhancing Corporate Governance in Islamic Financial Institutions”, paper presented to the IRTI-AAOIFI Conference on Transparency,Governance and Risk Management in Islamic Financial Institutions, held in Beirut Lebanon, March 2001.

  4. Al-Omar, Fouad (2000), “Supervision, Regulation and Adaptation of Islamic Banks to the Best Standards: The Way Forward”, paper presented to the Conference on Islamic Banking Supervision, Bahrain: AAOIFI February 18-19, 2000.

  5. Al-Sabah, Sheikh Salem Abdul Aziz (1999), “Regulatory Framework of Islamic Banking in the State of Kuwait”, keynote address delivered at the CBK-IMF Seminar on Design and Regulation of Islamic Financial Instruments, Kuwait, October 25-26, 1997.

  6. Saunders, John I (1966), “The Muslim World on the eve of Europe’s expansion (Englewood Cliff)”

  7. Suyuti, Jalal al-Din al- (n.d.), Al-Jami‘ al-Saghir (Cairo: ‘Abd al-Hamid Ahmad Hanafi), vol. 2, p. 96.

---------------------------

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN CITIZENS AND THEIR COURTS

By
MUHAMMAD MAJID BASHIR
B.Com, M.A, LL.B, DLL, DTL, DIPL, LL.M,
Civil Judge, Judicial Magistrate Sec.30
Director (Legal) PCP
Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Islamabad.
E-mail: judgemajid@hotmail.com

United States, Supreme Court, Chief Justice William Howard Traft stated in 1926 that “the real practical blessing of our bill of rights is in its provision for fixed procedure securing a fair hearing by independent Courts to each individual”.

            An impartial, independent Judiciary is the custodian of individual rights in a civilized society. In order for individuals to have faith in their Court system, all people must have access to the Courts when necessary.

            A judiciary that is seen as fair and independent is an important component in sustaining their trust and confidence. It is known “Independent of Judiciary” the confidence of the people.

            Living up to this ideal is a big challenge. It requires the involvement of many people, including legal educators, legislators, legal professionals, non governmental organizations and ordinary citizens. Effects to guarantee equal justice for all take many forms within our legal system.

            Our constitution provides all these guarantees, justice, rules of law, equality before law, equal protection before law, and right to a speedy and fair trial by an impartial judge.

            Above all these citizens expect that when conflicts between citizens or between the state and citizens arise. There is a place that is independent, impartial, safe and protective from undue influence, that is trustworthy, and that has authority over all the parties to solve the disputes peacefully and legally that’s why the Courts are considered the place of refuge.

            For this very purpose and ensuring legal protections and educating citizens of their fundamental rights and responsibilities, we have to describes how this doctrine work in practice in Pakistan and how we all will contribute to making “equal justice for all” a true reality.

            Court system has the mechanism recognized and accepted by all to resolve disputes peacefully. Alternative disputes resolution (ADR) system is a well experienced and appreciated system of resolving disputes in all civil society. In United States of America 80% disputes are being resolved through ADR mechanism which is quick, confidential and friendly in nature.

            Access to Justice depends upon access to the Court, access in the theoretical or legal sense is not enough, rather, it is the results that flow from the decision made by the Courts that give it meaning. For example, the value of “access” is evident when the Courts decide that no one, especially those in positions of power and holding authority, is above the law, or when access requires the right to counsel in cases where one’s liberty is in jeopardy.

            For the achievement, this idea of open access needs practical application of the fundamental right to access. The Court under the constitution will have to go through this judicial mill with grace and dignity. Denying access to the Courts forces disputes resolution into other areas and results in vigilantism, violence and disorder of law.

            Protecting children and disabled and mentally retarded persons, equal access to the Courts is not deserve for adult citizens only. Children, mentally retarded and disable deserve the save access to the nation’s Courts became they too are citizens and deserve their day in Courts.

            In Pakistan legal system, Juvenile Courts system and mental health Courts system do not exist practically. Children can not initiate legal actions without the assistance of adults. They may not know where to turns for assistance or even that help is available, and their voices are often unheard or unnoticed. Yet improving children’s access to the justice can help strengthen families and make victims of crime more likely to disclose their victimization and to support the legal process. We have to make our judicial system more accessible and amendable to children and their special needs.

            Certain amendments are required in which we have to make testifying in Courts easier for children.

1.         Special procedures, such as the use of closed circuit testimony and the assistance of special child advocates preferably lady lawyers can help lessen the potential trauma to child witnesses.

2.         Child friendly Court rooms, where the furniture is scaled down in size or where the judge do not sit high above every one else, can help children feel more comfortable in the Court room setting.

3.         The disable should be accommodated by installing entrance ramps, special elevators, hand rails, handicapped-accessible bathroom facilities and other modifications.

4.         Mental health counts for the patient special privileges should be given to the accused on the recommendations of the medical officers.

5.         The legal professions commitment is the next point which can close the heart of the public with the judiciary.

            Now the role of the Bar associations is absolutely different from its conventional style. Bar association have to play a role of training institute, it’s the Bar associations which grant to the councils a force to enforce their rulings on the two impartial reasons:-

1.                   Public trust and confidence in the system and

2.                   A strong commitment by the Bar to work with the Judiciary to establish and demand compliance of judicial decisions.

The Bar has to work hard to provide trained advocated or counsels in new laws to help the public better understand the proceedings and the reasoning behind Judges rulings in an effort to inspire public confidence and generate thoughtful public debate.

            We should remember that Bar and Bench are two wheel of Judicial system but we can make our system more stronger by adding litigants/general public and Court staff as third and forth wheel respectively.

            Our Judicial family is facing many problems, people from different other sectors have entered in our profession and giving wrong messages while blaming judiciary for delay in justice, corrupt in Judiciary, lawyers involvement in cases ete etc. We have to tackle this problem seriously by providing free legal services for poor persons.Bar Councils and Bar Associations are already in persuasion and trying to curb down this mafia through scrutiny and surveillance.

The Bar Associations should give citizen a voice and take in the Justice system in their respective Districts and areas. Bar Associations rule of law activities support local efforts to improve access to justice by developing legal aid and public defender programme, improving case administration, developing clinical legal education initiatives. Bars Associations should educate the public as well as the members of the association through training programme, seminar and workshop in the field of advance housing rights, Environmental law, Intellectual Property (IP) laws, combat, domestic violence, Consumer Protection law, cyber law, Electronic Crimes, Maritime law, Public interest litigation, WTO, ADR, Child protection law, Mental health cases, specially when child is involve in these cases, human traffic king, judicial ethics, Bar and Bench role. The Bar Association may conduct and hold training sessions in these fields by inviting resource person from other countries and then may recommend the trained lawyers to judge for Mediation, Arbitration and local commissions. On going sessions and training programme should be continued and will remain the pivotal role of the Bar Associations.

Rights to representation in criminal cases, it has been seriously observed that the assistance of an attorney in criminal proceeding has not been provided to an accused whereas it is a constitutional protection and in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defence. Government should arrange funds for the engagement of an attorney in criminal cases.

            Bar associations may provides assistance to low and moderate income people in its jurisdiction, through its own staff attorneys, neighborhood legal clinic and an extensive panel of volunteer lawyers.

            Clinical legal education (CLE) is another step to access to justice. Clinical legal education is a programme which enable law students to provide legal assistance to person and groups usually too poor to hire lawyers, working under the supervision of law faculty and sometimes other lawyers in their communities, law school clinic students learn how to practice law and solve client problems while providing access to the Courts for those in need.

Office Bearer of Bar Association such as the Lahore Bar Association, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta and Islamabad should start a pilot programme on these directions with the help of local law schools. The leaders of Bar Association and the Judges should support clinical legal education because clinical programmes play an important role in ensuring that access to the Courts. CLE is one of the most effective way of teaching law students layering skills and the values of legal profession. The trainee may be received as law Clarks, Court officials and law researcher, assigned counsel witness and evidence keeping record, private investigation process serving etc legal writing and drafting etc.

            In many countries of the world the legislation in high Courts would have to adopt laws or rules to permit students in clinical legal education courses to perform the work of lawyers. Even if, students are not given the license to practice law, clinical courses designed so that students may do as much of the work as possible under existing law and rules will be a huge step forward in these countries. In our country law students will feel more secure, confident and interestingly work in law field. We may remove this sign of frustration which normally exists among young lawyers and ultimately eliminates poverty and unemployment through implementation of clinical legal condition.

            Educating the public and reforming the judicial system. Most citizens knowledge of their Court system is limited to their experiences as litigants, witness there should be a programme from Government to educate the public at large and to improve the quality and administration of justice.

            Govt. may engage civic organizations, Bar Associations, Media and Government watch dog groups in its efforts to effect Court reform and to increase public confidence, it is very difficult to place a label on the relationship Pakistani citizens have with their Courts. Although, the Courts exist to serve the people, the judge’s duty is to apply the law in a fair and even handed manner. Education is the best way to resolve this tension, both of the citizenry and of the people who staff and run the Courts. Bar Association, media and non governmental organization can fill the role of educators, communicator and facilitator, bridging the gap between citizen’s expectation and the counts role.

We seek to engage citizens in all of our work. We speak to community groups, design programme for schools and publish and distribute citizens guides about the Courts.

            Citizens must be educated about the Courts, the importance of Courts and the need for change only with such knowledge can they be fully engaged in the effort to achieve reform. Good Judicial system is the need of the hours. Bars Associations and judiciary will have to work very hard to carry on this system, in this programme we may design programme on judicial ethics, equality and fairness, programs for witnesses, legislating changes, Court fee, process of summonses and notices. I believe that initiating the separate sphere of the public and the Courts will enable us to improve the Courts and restore public confidence in the judiciary and the Court system.

            Another step towards that direction would be Street Law. We should introduce street law for the service to the community, street law is a course in practical law, its focus is on the law that affects persons and every day lives more than 30 years ago, Georgetown University in Washington DC created a programme for its law school students to teach a course in a few local public high schools in the fundamental of law, democracy and human rights. The project became known as street law and eventually was extended to all public schools in the nation’s capital. Street law materials have grown from loose-leaf binder of lessons to a unique text book, now used in school districts in all 50 U.S states.

            Street law, in which law students worked with community groups and somebody had the idea not only to work with community groups but also to actually teach in high school classes.

            The street law book contains a general introduction to law and chapters on specific topics such as criminal law, consumer protection law and individual law. The book also is filled with problems, case studies and hypothetical solutions which are meant not to be just read as information but to be participated in by the reader and to be taught in an active way.

            Street law helps the students become critical thinkers and participators in government. The street law class develops analytical thinking, expressive writing and logic types of skills.

In role plays, debates and trials the students are doing the thinking and the talking in a well taught street law class, you engage the students in more writing and more articulation which enhances their literacy skills. If, we chase the history, it is quite clear that how role of Judiciary had been remained very effective on all sector of the society. The more you involve masses in understanding of law or in judicial system, the more you produce sensible citizens.

            Effective Judicial System has an impact on economy, democracy, culture, communities and building up of societies. This pillar of state is very strong which creates civic sense among the masses which leads to safety culture. The safety culture is the real difference between developed and developing countries.

--------------------------

WHEN CONSTITUTION IS INEFFECTIVE

By:
SYED MUHAMMAD KALEEM AHMAD KHURSHID
Ex-President Lahore High Court Bar
Association

1.       The Constitutions always specify the principles whereby the state confers rights upon its citizens. The Constitution is not a cause but is a consequence of personal and political freedom. No doubt, a person has a right to do something but it is not meant that the said right is not subject to any limitation. It is universal principle that rights carry with it the some restrictions.

2.       There are certain absolute rights and those rights are always protected by the Constitution. A society where rule of law prevails, the people are assured that their Fundamental Rights are protected. The Supreme Court has laid down in PLD 1991 SC 412 that protection of social justice amounts to eradication of social evils and protection of illiterate, poor persons in accordance with the tenants of Islam, while co-existence of power and corruption amounts to frustration of the Constitutional guarantees.

3.       Article 2-a: Provides that Objective Resolution is a substantive part of the Constitution. No doubt, it has been observed by the Supreme Court in 1993 SCMR 1718 that Objective Resolution after the incorporation of Article 2-a has not been fundamentally transformed from the role envisaged for it at the outset that it should serve as beacon light for the Constitution makers. While it was held in PLD 1987 Kar. 466 by Mr. Justice Tanzeel-ur-Rehman that even the law declared by the Supreme Court is subservient to the provision of Article 2(a) of the Constitution. The Courts are bound to declare any law repugnant to the injunctions of Holy Qur'an and Sunnah. These powers can be exercised by the Federal Shariat Court under Article 203 (a). But in Hakim Khan case (PLD 1992 SC 595), it was held that no doubt Objective Resolution has become the part of the Constitution but it is not supra Constitutional provision. If there is inconsistency between the provision of the Constitution and the same exceeds the limit prescribed by Al-mighty Allah, the matter can be brought to the notice of Parliament, which alone is competent to amend the Constitution and remedial legislation to bring the impugned provision in conformity with the injunctions of Islam. It was further observed that Article 2(a) was never intended to be self-explanatory document. The Court cannot strike down Article 45 of the Constitution even if the same is repugnant to Holy Qur'an and Sunnah. In this case the President of Pakistan commuted the sentence of accused persons under Article 45 of the Constitution. A full Bench of the High Court has held that under the Islamic jurisprudence only a "Wali" (Guardian) of the deceased can waive "Qisas" and not head of the State but the Supreme Court accepted the appeal and held that it is beyond the power of the Court to declare any provision of the Constitution to be repugnant to the injunctions of Islam. The Court by invoking Article 2(a) of the Constitution cannot strike down any other provision of the Constitution; thus, the said Article has lost its efficacy. It will not be out of place to mention here that in "Asma Jilani case" (PLD 1972 SC 139), it was held that successive manoeuvering for the usurpation of powers was neither justified nor valid and it was held that the Objective Resolution is the Grundnorm of the Constitution but in Zia-ur-Rehman case (PLD 1973 SC 49), it was observed that no doubt the Objective Resolution is an important document but it is neither a supra Constitutional document nor it is enforceable. Now, this very "Grundnorm" has been frustrated on 03.11.2007 by an individual.

4.       Article 3: It is incumbent upon the State to eliminate exploitation in any form which is opposed to human dignity and freedom of individual. The state should ensure that people are not exploited because of their wants, needs and due to economic compulsions. They should not be compelled to adopt a profession which is against their age and sex. It is Fundamental Rights of every person not to be forced to work without payment of labour, thus it is responsibility of the state to provide protection to the destitute, infirm persons, women, children and citizens against exploitation. Due to the New World Order, the new economic culture has emerged. The economic growth in the under developed countries has been jeopardized and sale of the national assets on throwaway prices is an exploitation which is unwarranted under the Constitution. The sale of the Pakistan Steel Mills, Habib Bank, United Bank, American Fertilizer Company and other national assets in haphazard manner is the result of the exploitation, thus only Constitutional Courts can come to the rescue of the public at large against this exploitation. The decision of the Supreme Court of Pakistan PLD 2006 SC 697 (Steel Mills case) is an eye opener. The golden shake hand culture has been introduced in Pakistan. In the under developed countries the right of food and right of shelter are also Fundamental Rights but the people are being deprived of their jobs due to the above said golden shake hand culture; millions of people are being deprived of their right of food and shelter. There is exorbitant increase in the prices of sugar, petrol, gas and cement. The real-estate business is also a source of exploitation while massive unemployment and retrenchment in Government and autonomous corporations have practically frustrated the object of Article 3 of the Constitution. The hiring of executives in six figures and retirement of the petty employees amounts to exploitation and the State has become the source of exploitation. At present agricultural workers and tenants of the military farms are the victims of cruel inhuman exploitation. Only the Constitutional Courts can come to the rescue of the nation against the aforesaid exploitations. When Supreme Court of Pakistan tried to eliminate exploitation whole of the judicial culture has been crushed by a retired general.

5.       Article 4: This Article envisages that every person in Pakistan is entitled to the protection of law and he should be dealt with in accordance with law. The rationale behind Article 4 is that acts of the state are not immune from scrutiny even legislature cannot enact any law when a particular person or class will be immune from scrutiny. The establishment of Defence Housing Authority culture in the country have practically eliminated the concept of equality before law because undue immunities have been extended to the said housing societies, which is not only unconstitutional but discriminatory as well. When the Constitutional Courts cannot come to the rescue of the public at large against the above said societies. The Article has lost its utility. Article 4 is, in fact, a modified form of "due process of law" as interpreted by the American Constitutional Courts. This Article provides that rights of the citizens shall not be invaded except by law, but the detention of the citizens by the Government agencies without due process of law is not being adjudicated upon by the Courts while the Courts are bound to protect the rights of the citizens against the illegal detention. The citizens of Pakistan are being arrested and deported without due process of law by the foreign agencies. The brutal killing of Hayatullah Khan, correspondent of "Daily Nation", amounts to aggression by the state; moreover it has frustrated the due process of law because extra-judicial killing is the rule of the day.

6.       The establishment is not conscious of the concept of the sovereignty of nation. The Government cannot take any action without legal sanction and at the same time the legislature cannot create any authority especially when its actions are not subject to law. Any illegal exercise of jurisdiction cannot be validated when a person has not been dealt with in accordance with law but every regime has got validated its acts and omissions by amending Article 270 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has upheld the judgment of the High Court that state land cannot be allotted to the Government servants. The said judgment is reported in (Brig: Muhammad Bashir case) 2004 PSC 453, but the said judgment has not been followed as such executive authorities are not performing their duties in accordance with law, subsequently, allotment of the land to the Government servants is not in accordance with law. Thus it is apparent that due process of law is being frustrated, as such, Article 4 of the Constitution has been made ineffective.

7.       Loyalty to the State: Obedience to the Constitution and the law is the basic obligation of every citizen. As envisaged by Article 244, "every member of armed forces of Pakistan takes oath that he will uphold the Constitution". But the Constitution was partially abrogated by General Zia-ul-Haq subsequently twice by retired general Pervez Musharraf, thus, violating the terms of oath. Present regime has also violated Article 5 of the Constitution. The persons on the helm of affairs think themselves to be above their respective oaths, thus failed to uphold the Constitution, as such, they cannot claim loyalty to the state when they are not loyal to the Constitution.

8.       Article 6: Any person who abrogates, conspires or subverts the Constitution shall be guilty of high treason and punishment is to be provided by the Parliament. The High Treason Act of 1973 has been enforced on 29th September 1973 (PLD 1974 Central Statute 34). Section 3 of the above said Act provides the procedure where a complaint in writing can be made by a person who is authorized by Federal Government in this behalf. Till today, no person has been authorized by the Federal Government to lodge the complaint, as such; this Article is ineffective due to administrative reasons. It has been observed by the Supreme Court in PLD 1993 SC 473 at page 601 that under the Constitution, the Parliament has discharged its duty on 29.09.1973 by framing requisite law on the subject, but the Federal Government has not so far designated the authorized person who can lodge the complaint. It is not the Constitution but the executive has failed to give meaningful operational machinery for the enforcement of Article 6, thus frustrating this Article in letter and spirit. If this Article would have been operational, nobody can dare to suspend or abrogate the Constitution.

9.       Article 9: This Article envisages that any person cannot be deprived of his life and liberty, therefore, detention of any person by the security agencies amounts to violation of Article 9 of the Constitution. Many citizens have been deprived of their liberty. They have been arrested and deported; tried and executed, thus, deprived of their life and liberty, which was not in accordance with law. Not only deportation of Aimal Kansi to America but also many other citizens of Pakistan have been deported Guanta Namo without due process of law and in violation of the above said Article as well. Thus, the above said Article has practically become ineffective for the last so many years due to the executive high handedness. Brigadier (Retd) Taj and his family were insulted, abducted, humiliated by the member of an Intelligence Agency (Dawn Daily 16 July 2006). Dr. Safdar Sarki and many others were not traceable although he was subsequently recovered on the direction of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, how we can say that any person cannot be deprived of his life and liberty? We should not ignore the fake police encounters, whereby, the citizens are put to death in this part of the world without any trial by Court of law.

10.     Article 10: This Article also safeguards the arrest and detention of the citizens. The citizens are being illegally detained, thus the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by this Article are frustrated. The detenue can file a representation, and during the pendency of the representation the detention period expires. Thus, the detenues are being deprived of legal remedies, and they are debarred to seek the enforcement of Fundamental Rights through the legislative process. Article 10 is ineffective due to the administrative hurdles.

11.     (Supreme Court of India has declared in AIR 1966 SC 239 (State of MP Vs. Shuba Ram) that the right to defend the accused includes not only to defend the citizens against the illegal arrest but legal advice should be provided) but in the departmental inquiries the civil servants have been denied the right to seek the assistance of the legal practitioners. Under Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Servants E&D Rules, the civil servants cannot engage or consult a legal practitioner; thus practically Article 10 has been frustrated by incorporation of similar provision in the Civil Servants E&D Rules, framed by the Central Government. These rules are violative of the Fundamental Rights.

12.     The delay on the part of the Government to consider the representation was deprecated in writ petition and the detenue was released in India, when any explanation for the delay was not forthcoming (AIR 1975 SC 367). But in Pakistan representation has become a hurdle in the release of detenues although the order of detention may be perverse thus practically nullifying Article 10 of the Constitution.

13.     Article 11: Provides safeguards against the trafficking in human beings but unfortunately the girls and boys in Pakistan are being exported. The citizens of this country are being plundered by the agents who are busy in human trafficking and the Government has miserably failed to unearth the said persons. And this culture has not been eliminated by the State which resulted in negation of the Article 11 of the Constitution.

14.     Article 12: The NAB Ordinance 1999 was enforced, wherein according to Section 2, the Ordinance shall be deemed to have come into force from the 1st January 1985, while the same violates Article 12 of the Constitution; whereby any person cannot be punished when the act or omission was not punishable by law at the time of such act or omission.

15.     Although protection of Article 270 of the Constitution is being raised as a defence but it has been observed by Mr. Justice Mian Nazir Akhtar (minority view) in Shahida Faisal case (PLD 2000 Lah: 508) that retrospective effect has been given to the NAB Ordinance 1999 while the same is also violative of universal declaration of Human Rights, thus, from the above said observations, it is apparent that Article 12 of the Constitution has been frustrated and made redundant by the present regime.

16.     Article 14: This Article declares that dignity of the man is inviolable and privacy of the person is also inviolable as such the police raids on the dwelling house are violative of Article 14. It is held in PLD 1993 SC 473 that the President can neither dissolve National Assembly nor he can dismiss the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. The charge of subversion against the Prime Minister is violative of Article 14. The speech of the Prime Minister does not amount to subversion, because subversion being high treason, the same is the most serious offence that can be committed against one's own country. The President has no authority to pronounce such a findings. Although subsequently the same Prime Minister has been removed in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The dignity of Ex-Prime Minister has been violated while he was expelled from the country.

17.     Article 15 Extends protection to the freedom of movement of every citizen of Pakistan. Supreme Court has declared in PLD 1987 SC 504 (Dada Amir Haider Khan’s case) that application for the grant of passport cannot be refused without giving an opportunity of being heard and it has been held in PLD 1966 Dacca 576 that a right of a citizen to remain in Pakistan is an unqualified right, and he cannot be banished from his country (Mustafa Ansari case). It is also apparent from this Article that reasonable restriction can be imposed upon the movement of dangerous persons and these restrictions should not be arbitrary one. The Court can ascertain the reasonableness of actions reference can be had from AIR 1954 SC 229. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has declared in PLD 2004 SC 583 (Mian Shahbaz Sharif case and subsequently in Nawaz Sharif case) that Article 15 of the Constitution bestows a right on every citizen of Pakistan to enter or move freely throughout the country and to reside and settle in any part thereof. The right to enter in the country cannot be denied but a citizen can be restrained from going out of the country. It was held by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Shahbaz Sharif case that petitioner is a citizen of Pakistan and has a Constitutional right "to enter and remain in the country".

18.     In spite of the above observations of the Supreme Court, Mr. Shahbaz Sharif as well as Mian Nawaz Sharif have not been allowed to enter in the country and they have been deported from the country: thus this Article has been frustrated by the present regime as such Article 15 has been defeated. Even otherwise, the Charter of the Human Rights Declaration has been vioalted and former Prime Minister of Pakistan has not been treated in accordance with law and he has been deprived of the equal protection of law.

19.     Article 16: Freedom of assembly is an essential element in a democratic set up. The right to lead a procession is neither a right of easement nor customary right but it is a Fundamental Rights. However, the people of Pakistan, in spite of the so called democratic culture, cannot hold independent meetings, and they cannot lead processions, and unwarranted restrictions have been imposed by the administration upon such activities resulting in the negation of Article 16.

20.     Article 19 guarantees the freedom of speech and expression as well as Fundamental Rights of freedom of press. In the Constitution of 1956 freedom of press was not specifically guaranteed. One cannot deny that a free press stands as one of the greatest interpreter between the Government and the people. Freedom of press implies a right to acquire information and right to acquire information includes the right of access to the source of information (AIR 1973 SC 106). The said right has been highlighted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in PLD 1993 SC 473. The right of citizen to receive information can be inferred from the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Article 19 of the Constitution. The Freedom of Information Ordinance was promulgated on 10.01.1997, but the same lapsed; even otherwise, the said Ordinance was not a big achievement. The said Ordinance does not allow to receive information in respect of appointment, promotion and dismissal of the Government servants while the public has legitimate interest in appointment, promotion and dismissal action of the civil servants and the judiciary. The citizens of this country have every right to have access to the working of the Government. Subsequently, Freedom of Information Ordinance was enforced on 26.10.2002. Even a perusal of Freedom of Information Ordinance section 8 will reveal that noting on file, minutes of the meeting and any inter medial opinion or recommendation have been excluded from its purview. Thus the corruption has been saved from its exposure to the public; unless and until the clause 'A', 'B' and 'C of section 8 are not deleted, the same are hurdle in the freedom of information. While definition of public body in section 2 (h) is available, the same has been restricted to ministers and attached departments of the Federal Government, thus, Provincial Government, Autonomous Bodies have been excluded from the purview of the Ordinance as well. There is no justification to exclude the same because everybody is conscious that due to pressure of the donor agencies, this Ordinance has been enforced but still the executive has tried its best to exclude provincial ministries etc. from the purview of Freedom of Information Ordinance. There is no justification to frame separate laws for the provinces because this law was promulgated to ensure the Fundamental Rights incorporated in Article 19 of the Constitution. It will not be out of place to mention here that freedom of information rules have been published in the year 2004. This Ordinance is enforced to protect the wrong doers. A fine can be imposed upon the complainant if the same is malicious, frivolous, false; thus, harassing and humiliating the complainant especially when he is at the mercy of the authority who will determine whether the application is malicious or frivolous, even otherwise, many restrictions have been imposed upon the media.

21.     There is no such provision in the said Ordinance that classified record will be declassified after 30 years, thus creating hurdle in the way of persons who are in search of truth. The above said Freedom of Information Ordinance does not fulfil the requirements of Fundamental Rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, while the same frustrates the basic concepts of the above said Article of the Constitution.

22.     Article 24: After bare perusal of Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution, it will transpire that under Article 23 every citizen has a right to acquire, hold and dispose of property, while under Article 24 no person can be deprived of his property compulsorily, save in accordance with law, and the property cannot be acquired except for public purpose. As such any person cannot be deprived of his property, but generally, without acquiring the property, the same is utilized and usurped by the state functionaries. It was declared in 1997 MLD 1792 that when an owner of property was deprived of his property without payment of compensation, penalty was imposed by the High Court; as such, it is evident that tendency of depriving the citizens from their property without due process of law is the rule of the executive while administration does not care for the Constitution and they are acting in an unwarranted manner. Thus, the above said Article of Constitution is being violated and the poor citizens are helpless against these atrocities. It will not be out of place to mention here that the word “Public Purpose" has also been interpreted in 2003 PSC 1196 and citizens are being deprived of their if properties for the undue advantage of the land grabbers and Article 24 has been practically been negated by the administration.

23.     Article 25 envisages that all the citizens are equal before law and they are entitled to equal protection of law. Equality before law is not present in this part of the World. Civilians and political workers/opponents are being prosecuted under the NAB Ordinance, and protection has been extended to the Generals and the judiciary. Thus the concept of equality before law has been frustrated NAB Ordinance because majority of NAB infected persons are the ruling elite.

24.     In India allocation of 33% marks for oral interview at an examination was declared as violutive of the equal protection of law in AIR 1981 SC 487, AIR 1984 SC 1420 while in Pakistan seats are reserved in the educational institutions for the privileged classes. The political workers are being prosecuted under the NAB Ordinance and under Anti-Terrorist Act, 1997 but the persons having political affiliation with the ruling JANTA are protected by the administration. It is very strange that when it has been declared in PLD 2000 SC 869 that Chief of Army Staff being a holder of Constitutional post cannot be removed in violation of the principles of natural justice that no one should be condemned unheard. Whether the elected Prime Minister of Pakistan who is also holder of a Constitutional post can be removed in violation of the principles of natural justice: thus, the equality before law has been omitted from consideration. The time is not far when this controversy has to be resolved and at least equality before law should be provided to the Prime Minister who is also a holder of Constitutional post; thus this Article has been omitted from consideration in Zafar AN Shah case.

25.     Article 27: Prescribe that no citizen shall be discriminated while in the service of Pakistan. In the present set up according to some sources 600 Army officials have been inducted in the civil service thus the civil servants are being prejudiced and discriminated due to this induction. They are compelled to survive as OSD and Army officials are being inducted while frustrating Article 27.

26.     Article 35: (Protection of family life): The state is bound to protect the matrimonial life of the families and state is bound to safeguard this Fundamental Rights but the said rights are being violated by the police. Knowingly that the girl is married to another person, despite the decision of Full Bench case (Hafiz Abdul Waheed Vs. Asma Jilani) reported in PLD 1997 Lah: 301 which has been upheld by the Supreme Court in PLD 2004 SC 219, still Family Courts Act has not been amended and power of registration of marriage has not been conferred upon the Family Courts. Thus state has failed to protect family life of the citizens, resulting in the violation of Article 33.

27.     Article 37 envisages that state shall arrange for the technical, professional education to all on the basis of merits but the poor students are being deprived of their access to higher education due to introduction of self-finance scheme. The children of middle and poor class have been deprived lived of the right of professional education due to poverty.

28.     Double standard of education has been introduced which is clearly violative of Article 37 of the Constitution and the students of wealthy class and high ups are getting better opportunities through the walk in interviews while the other citizens of this country are not provided with equal opportunity in higher professional education as well as in jobs.

29.     Article 37(d) envisages inexpensive and expeditious justice. Despite the decision of the Federal Shariat Court, PLD 1992 FSC 195, still the Court fee is being recovered. Thus concept of inexpensive justice is jeopardized and frustrated. The orphans and widows are unable to have access to justice due to non-payment of Court fee: who is responsible for it?

30.     So far as expeditious justice is concerned, despite this fact that Pakistan has obtained soft loan of 3.5 billion from the Asian Development Bank, still the Courts have failed to provide expeditious justice. The same has resulted in the improvement of standard of buildings and Court rooms but the same has not resulted in the disposal of cases in expeditious manner. The Courts as well as legislation have failed lo fulfil Constitutional requirements.

31.     So far as Article 37(b) is concerned, the education is expensive and rate of illiteracy in Pakistan is higher in whole of the South East Asia and we are spending very meager amount for the elimination of illiteracy while we are spending billions on the unproductive construction of GHQs and cantonments. We are unfortunately spending huge amounts upon the VIP culture, which is evident from the purchase of bullet proof cars. We should have arranged inexpensive free education. But this principle of policy is being overlooked.

32.     Article 38: The state shall care for the well being of the people and facilities should be provided for livelihood within the available sources of the country: but millions of people of Pakistan are deprived of their livelihood under the garb of golden shake hand. The state is exploiting the situation, four years back Trading Corporation of Pakistan purchased sugar from the Mills at the rate of Rs.17 per kg and it was sold to the public at Rs.30 per kg. Similarly, prices of Petrol and diesel as well as natural gas are exorbitant. The local manufactured cars are very expensive due to collaboration of the establishment. The social and economic well being of the people has never been kept in view and the poor citizens are victim of exploitation by the administration. The opportunities have not been provided to the people within the available resources of the country. The common man has been squeezed. The middle class has been eliminated and has fallen into the lap of poverty. The unnecessary expenses on VIP culture should be curtailed, then a lot of money will be available for the welfare of the poor man.

33.     Article 38 (a): envisages that "the concentration of the wealth will be prevented. It has been held in PLD 1992 Lah: 277 that concentration of wealth in few hands must be avoided. It has been declared by the Supreme Court in 2004 PSC 453 that we have no hesitation in our mind that land cannot be allotted to any person who is in service of Central/Provincial Government, any development authority, Semi-Government, Institution and Local Bodies": as such, allotment of land to the Generals is unwarranted. But in spite of the above said decision the land is being allotted to the Generals thus frustrating the clause (a) of Article 38, whereby, the wealth is being concentrated in a class. Objectives of Article 38 can only be achieved and concentration of wealth can be prevented when the prices of the commodities come out to affordable prices:-

          i)        When the corruption will not be validated and the same will be unearthed.

          ii)       When legal cover to the corruption will be withdrawn.

          iii)      Allotment of land and plots to the Generals will be stopped and these resources will be utilized for the masses, otherwise, this Article is ineffective: The same may be deleted from the Constitution due to its ineffectiveness.

34.     Article 38 (e): The state shall reduce disparity in the income of earning of individuals, but in Pakistan certain individuals are receiving exorbitant remuneration and the services of subordinate staff are terminated and they are being hanged at the altar of golden shake hand: as such, millions of employees have been deprived of their livelihood. Article 38 (e) also narrates that state shall eliminate RIBA but after the remand of the case by the Supreme Court, Federal Shariat Court has failed to perform its Constitutional functions The state has failed to eliminate RIBA: thus Article 38 (e) has become redundant.

35.     Article 63: In view of the rule laid down in PLD 1995 Lah: 541 (Ch. Iltaf Hussain case), this Article has become redundant because at the time of the filing of nomination papers, disqulaification cannot be kept in view and only qualification can be taken into consideration. This rule of law has been approved by the Full Bench (PLD 1998 Lah. 461, Mr. Rafique Tarrar case) whereby the question of disqualification cannot be considered at the time of filing of nomination papers; the same has resulted in the redundancy of this Article because now a disqualified person can be elected. These judgments have paved the way for unconstitutional protection to the violaters of the constitution, on the other hand it has been held in PLD 2002 Lah: 521 (Umar Ahmad Ghumman case), "the disqualification comes into play the moment a person becomes a candidate or seeks election". It was also held in 1995 CLC 158 that Haji Aman Ullah Khan petitioner was an employee of Afghan Refugee Foundation as such he cannot contest the election within bar of two years. It is held in 1993 MLD 2489 that Article 62 and Article 63 are interlinked and have to be read together and not in isolation. Abida Hussain was an Ambassador on contract basis as such she was disqualified to contest the election. The above interpretation has resulted to negate this Article. Thus, the Supreme Court of Pakistan was penalized and scraped when the Court was interpreting Article 63.

36.     Article 63(a): The Speaker has refused to entertain the recommendation of the parliamentary party in respect of the some members who were said to have defected their parliamentary party. The Speaker turned down the reference on the ground that he could not recognize the leaders of the parliamentary party, in this way, the government has frustrated the above said Article 63(a) of the Constitution. It will not be out of place to mention that in Pir Ghulam Sabir Shah case PLD 1995 SC 66, if the above said menace of horse trading would have been eliminated, the government should not have dared to frustrate defection clause. "Lota Political Culture" is flourishing and the Constitution is sinking. The members of the opposition were persuaded and they have been shifting their loyalties. Thus the said Article has practically lost its efficacy.

37.     Article 63 (1)(k): clearly transpires that a person who is in service of Pakistan cannot be elected as member of the Parliament; as such, Pervez Musharraf cannot be elected as President of Pakistan, unless and until, the said Article is not amended. Through the subordinate legislation this Article of the Constitution cannot be frustrated. General Pervez Musharraf was holding the office of Chief of Staff thus he has practically negated this Constitutional provision. Disqualification on the ground of defection has also been negated by the Speaker of Punjab Assembly.

38.     Articles 78 & 118: It is essential feature of the democratic government to control the public tunds. It is the duty of the government to receive and recover the taxes and other amounts and the same should be accounted for in the public exchequer. It may be pointed out that certain public money generating institutions are not being controlled under the Constitution, which amounts to a state within state.

39.     Defence Housing Authorities have been exempted from the registration of the sale-deeds and the said Authorities are recovering the exorbitant fee from their members and utilizing the same. The armed personnel are performing their duties in F.W.O, LAFCO and NLC. Whether earnings of the said Authorities are becoming the part of the public exchequer and whether they are accounting for their expenditure as such Constitutional provisions in this behalf are being violated.

40.     Article 175 (2): provides that any Constitutional Court shall not have jurisdiction unless it is conferred by the Constitution or under any law. The Constitution can only be amended by the parliament under Articles 238 and 239 of the Constitution and the Constitution can only be amended if not less than 2/3 members of the total house pass the Constitutional amendment bill, thus the powers for the amendment of the Constitution can neither be exercised by any Court nor by any individual: but the powers of the amendment of Constitution has been conferred by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Zafar Ali Shah case PLD 2000 SC 869 and subsequently in 2007 ignoring Article 175(2) of the Constitution.

41.     Article 175(3): The judiciary has been separated from the executive keeping in view the rule laid down by the Supreme Court in Sharaf Faridi case, PLD 1994 SC 105. The said Article is a self-operating provision of the Constitution and separation has taken place since August 1987, while keeping in view the direction by the Supreme Court, the process of separation has been implemented, as such, Article 175(3) is a past and closed transaction and is no more required for future guidance.

42.     Article 203(d), (3-a): This clause was introduced when the Parliament was not in existence. Now the laws cannot be amended by the President or the Governor. Laws can only be amended by the Parliament as such this clause is liable to deletion being superfluous one.

43.     Article 212: The unfettered and unrestricted powers of the executive to appoint Chairman and members of the Service Tribunal is affecting the independent functioning of the tribunals, because members of the tribunals carry a sense of obligation to the executive for having been appointed by them. The appointment of the members and the Chairman has prejudicial effect on the independence of the tribunal. Secondly, as envisage by the proviso of Section 4 of the Service Tribunal Act, 1973 an appeal does not lie to the tribunal unless the aggrieved person has preferred an appeal, application, review or representation before the concerned authority and a period of 90 days has not expired, thus, the aggrieved persons have been deprived of any legal remedy till the expiry of 90 days which amounts to denial of justice through the subordinate legislation. The aggrieved persons cannot be deprived of right of judicial review for this long period of 90 days. Even otherwise, the Service Tribunal has no original jurisdiction, as such, the Article 212 and the law enacted by the legislature has practically frustrated the right of judicial review available to the aggrieved persons under Article 199 of the Constitution.

44.     Article 230(4): The Islamic Ideology Council shall submit its final report within 7 years of its appointment. The Constitution was enforced in 1973. Islamic Ideology Council has failed to submit its final report within stipulated period. Such report has not been laid before the Parliament within the requisite period nor the laws have been amended in accordance with the final report, as such, it is a mockery with Constitution to retain such provision which is ineffective.

45.     Articles 238 & 239: Prescribe the procedure for amendment of the Constitution. Only Parliament can amend the Constitution while the Constitution cannot be amended by votes of less than 2/3 majority of the total members of the House. The said Article does not confer powers upon Supreme Court lo allow an individual to amend the Constitution: thus, the said Articles have not been kept in view while granting permission to amend the Constitution to the Chief of Staff in Zafar Ali Shah case, PLD 2000 SC 869 and subsequently by the newly inducted judges in 2007.

46.     Article 244: This Article envisages that every member of armed forces of the Pakistan takes oath prescribed in the III Schedule. Oath prescribed in the Schedule clearly envisages that the deponent shall not be engaged in the political activities: But needless to mention that the then Chief of Staff was busy in the political activities, thus, frustrating his oath under Article 244 of the Constitution. Engineer Jamil Malik was dismissed from service on this ground that he is a government servant and is involved in political activities. His order of dismissal was upheld by the Supreme Court in PLJ 2004 SC 108, but in violation of this judgment former Chief of Staff is busy in the political activities. This attitude is haunting the public at large.

47.     Article 253: envisages that the Parliament can prescribe maximum limit of property that can be owned, possessed or controlled by any person, but the land Reforms were declared to be against the injunctions of Holy Qur'an and Sunnah in PLD 1990 SC 99; as such, this Article was practically omitted from consideration. Now any person can retain unlimited holding. This Article of the Constitution has become ineffective due to above said judqment.

48.     Article 270(c): is a new proivsion and the same was incorporated through Legal Frame Work Order, 2002, whereby, the Judges of the Constitutional Courts having taken oath under Oath of office (Judges) Order, 2002, the oath was validated. But on the other hand, the Judges who were not given the oath they were not allowed to be restored. Nothing can be said more than this that the amendment has frustrated the independence of judiciary, even otherwise, the same is a stigma upon the Constitution and the same should be deleted.

49.     The self serving amendments have altered the basic structure of the Constitution and the same has been mutilated by the rulers. The biggest failure of the rulers is to develop a national consensus on workable framework and the Constitution has lost its sanctity.

50.     According to the Laski's theory, the control of Armed Forces is an essential element of sovereignly of the state and the Armed Forces are under command of the state. Once the state loses the command it becomes ineffective and must either change the law or abdicate it.

51.     Only democracy can provide economic dividends to the people. Now the people are suffering because we have failed to evolve a system of good governance. We should follow the Constitution for achieving the welfare of the people.

52      No doubt, the Constitution is a document for all times to come which flourishes with the passage of time and in accordance with the requirements of the society. The Constitution is a permanent document. Thus it is essential that undemocratic amendments should be omitted from it.

------------------------

HUDOOD ORDINANCE AND GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN PAKISTAN: IMPEDIMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS

By:
MAIMONA KHANAM*

INTRODUCTION

Pakistan is an Islamic country and the citizens of the country have full believed in Islamic teaching and its beliefs. The all constitutions of the country which were promulgated with the passage of time permit the implementations of Islamic provisions within the society.

The Hudood Ordinance of 1979;[71] introduced by then President of Pakistan, General Zia-ul-Haq[72] was overall part of his process of Islamization in the country.

ABSTRACT

The Hudood Ordinance of 1979 was not properly evaluated by the Pakistani Muslim jurists under the present circumstances which have created an anomaly in its interpretation and practice within the society, which affected the different sects of society. For example General discrimination was one of them where this ordinance has categorically victimized the women.

The discussion in this article has been focused on those impediments and implications which has affected the status of women under Hudood Ordinance in Pakistan.

DEFINITION

The offences under the Islamic law from the point of view of their proof and punishment can be divided into `Hadd’[73] and 'Tazir'[74]. In Holy Quran the word 'Hadd’ has not been used in a singular but it has been used at fourteen places in plural in the sense of restriction or bounds set by Allah. The ' Hudood' of Allah are of two kinds. First those ordinances prescribed to men respecting eatables and drinkables and marriages. What are lawful and what are unlawful. The second kind of punishment prescribed or appointed to be inflicted upon him who does that which he has been forbidden.

The Law dealing with these crimes is known Hudood Laws. The 'Hadd' crimes are Zina (Adultery) or unlawful intercourse. `Qadf’, (false accusation of unlawful intercourse), drinking wine, theft are high way robbery.

According to the Islamic injunction for the implementation of Hudood Laws four 'Tazkia-al-Shahood'[75] witnesses are necessary.

During Khalafat period and after that almost in all the Muslim states where Courts were established under Shariah, a regular institution of purgation for equity into the character of a witness was set up under a Qazi. The institution of purgation was developed to meet the requirements of Quranic Injunction and Sunnah necessitating the purgation of witness required to beat testimony before a Court of Law. Under Quranic injunctions it is obligatory for every Muslim to been testimony and concealing of the evidence is not Law full".[76] It is enjoined in Sura Baqra, Ayat No.283 that "conceal not evidence: for who ever conceal it, his heart is tainted with sin"

Regarding Zina the Quran states. "The women and man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them a hundred strips; let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah if ye believe in Allah and the last day, and let a party of believers witness their punishment".[77]

On the issue of Qadhf, the Quran states, "and those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegation) flog them with eighty strips: and reject their evidence ever after; for such men are wicked transgressor".[78]

HADOOD ORDINANCE

The Hudood Ordinance is a composition of four different Ordinances and schedules comprising on the following:

1.       The Offence of `Zina' (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 (Order VII of 1979).

2.       The Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd Order. 1979. (Order IV of 1979).

3.       Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. (Order VI of 1979).

4.       Offence of Qazf[79] (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979, (Order VIII of 1979)

The above mentioned Laws are equally enforceable throughout the country, as these have been made applicable on all individuals who fall within the mischief of these Laws, irrespective of religion, caste, and creed excepting of course, those provisions which create certain exceptions in case of non- Muslims.

CRITICISM

The Hadood Laws are under direct attack of criticism by the all walk of life in Pakistan". The demand for repeal of these laws has also been endorsed by a number of eminent Jurists. It has criticized on much ground with the following:

1.       As being clearly discriminatory and causing grave injustice to women and minorities.

2.       As violative of the basic principle of justice, equality and human rights.

3.       As badly constructed law.

4.       As not being in accordance with Islamic injunctions, which categorically declare that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex alone, and further states that all citizens are equal under the law and entitled to equal protection of law.

It has been said very emphatically that the Hudood Laws are aimed at stopping cruelty. But in practice "The Zina Ordinance of 1979 has also contributed to restricting women's rights. The gender discrimination inherent in it has sent an affirmative signal to that intent a treating woman as second class human being with fewer rights than men. At the same time it has provided a handy tool with which to punish women who take any initiative with respect to their choice of a spouse, police continue to register complaints of abduction and Zina against women who have married of their own free will".[80]

Some times Zina is committed at victim's home. According to sec 4 of this Ordinance ''offence of Zina, Women, held, could not be punished for offence of Zina if committed against her will, forcible or during sleep or while under influence of some intoxicant administered to her against her will".[81]

Some time circumstantial evidence is bypassed by the S.H.O (Station House Officer) while lodging F.l.R (First Information Report) and women is victimized. "In cases under the Hadood ordinance, the investigation is more often unsatisfactory for example in a case of Zina, or rape the entire family is roped in, as accused persons without realizing that this mixture of untruth with truth may render the truth as doubtful.

Some times proof of Nikah (marriage) is furnished which negates the charge of Zina, and yet the husband and wife have to run the risk of criminal prosecution. More often the girl is first arrested and then with the collaboration of the members of her family, she is pressurized to deny the Nikah in order to involve the male. There are cases in which the prosecutrix is not medically examined till quite late. Thus the corroborative evidence is completely ignored.

It is a matter of general observation that in cases where the abductees is taken to different places no attempt is made by police officer to pinpoint the locality where she was taken and to collect evidence from there, similarly the neighbours from the locality where she was taken away and to collect evidence from there, are rarely examined. It is very difficult to prove a case of taking away under Section 16, offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance 1979".[82]

Women forum often criticize that it totally ousts women's testimony in the imposition of Hudd or maximum penalty. If Zina is committed in presence of a women witness, only the offender is escaped. In this way woman is deprived of testimony. There is no legislation on this point.

Under the Ordinance, distinction is made between Hadd and Tazir for Zina, as Hadd punishments are generally more severe and require a more rigorous standard of proof. If the accused confesses the crime, or if there are four pious adult Muslim male eye-witnesses to the actual act of penetration, the Hadd penally may be applied. This higher standard of evidentiary requirement is not met, and if there are other complications as well (appeals retractions of confessions, etc)

The Zina ordinance has equated rape and adultery, although adultery is an act of consent while rape is a crime of violence. Thus rape is treated as "a form of adultery' even though it is without the consent of the women being violated.

Another objection with regard to Hudood laws is that for theft 4.457 grams of gold or equivalent amount of money is sufficient for the imposition of Hadd, where as the Holy Prophet (SAW) fixed it as the price of the most costly item of his time. The price of 4.457 gram of gold today is nominal, and it is unjust to inflict the punishment of amputation of hand for such a small amount of money. It can be amended according to present circumstances through Ijtihad.

IMPLICATIONS

Under the Ordinance a victim of Zina has to suffer a lot due to expenses and other hardships. If woman becomes pregnant she is sentenced but man is acquitted. There are also procedural gaps in the implementation of theselaws. The most critical point with regard to Zina Ordinance is that no difference is kept between Zina and Zina-bit-Jabr.[83] Same proof is required for both.

Women have suffered Jail though some times they are not guilty, jail manual does not allow her to be treated as accused. She is generally treated as convicted.

Qazf Ordinance has also turned out to be a weapon for the victimization of women. It would be tragic if the Hudood itself become a tool of cruelty. Punishment is not an end itself. Enforcing Hudood on the poor and exempting the rich and the influential is in itself a negation of the concept of Hudood. It also seems to be violation of the constitution, which categorically declares that "there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex alone and further states that all citizens arc equal under the law and entitled to equal protection of law".[84]

The early years after the introduction of the Ordinance, while the Courts still trying to grapple with interpreting and enforcing the new provisions, were amongst the worst for women in Pakistan. As it is, very few women report rape, largely because of the social stigma attached to extra marital sex, as in a patriarchal society, which refuses to acknowledge the existence of sexual relations outside of marriage, blame inevitably attaches to the female involved.

Experience of the Courts ensured that there would be even fewer reported cases, if it were not for the situations where women are compelled to report rape i.e in cases of pregnancy or in cases of Zina are lodged against them.[85] The reason behind all is that women have a fear of facing worst circumstances after case is decided. Civil society does not accept her whether she is innocent or guilty. Further more she is afraid of loosing protection and defending her self. "While the Ordinance raises numerous questions, our concern is, those affecting women specifically. Firstly by prescribing that their must be four Muslim male adults as eyewitnesses, it excludes the testimony of women although for Hadd.

Moreover it is most unlikely that two same persons in any civilized society will have sexual intercourse in a manner and in a place wherein four adult males can see with their own eyes that act of carnal conjunction.

WOMEN PROTECTION BILL

The President Pervaiz Musharraf’s government in 2006 brought an amended bill under the title of Women Protection Bill’. According to which fornication has been made a non-cognizable offence and the magistrate can take cognizance of offence.

One of the major developments under this bill is that women will not go to police station to launch FIR. Any body can directly report to magistrate and women will not be sending to jail.

Another major development is that if circumstantial evidence proves that Zina-bil-Jabr was committed to her. that a women can be acquitted.

In cases of Zina-Bil-Jabr four witnesses as which are Tuzkia-id-Shuhood give evidence against culprit. In this case Quranic Hadd of Zina can be inflicted. This offence has become punishable because now it falls in Tazir and punishment of Tazir can be inflicted on culprits.

Another problem was that false nikahnama (marriage certificate) was often produced in Court and woman was accused of double nikahnama though truth was that it was used to deprive a women from property rights and to insult her and her husband, if she was married to person against the will of guardian.

For false accusation now the punishment is five years. If a girl under 16 years of age commits zina with consent, the punishment cannot be inflicted on her because usually she is not sufficient mature to feel its consequences. It is apprehended that it will encourage girl child abuse. It may be critically examined.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are based on the principle of Ijtihad (interpretation) to meet the requirements of Hadood Law as there is difference between Hudood Laws and Hudood-ullah.

1.       Hudood-Ullah cannot be change. It should be enforced as it is. There can be change in case of Taazir because it has to be decided by ruler of the time. Moreover many procedural gaps can be filled by judicial experts.

2.       All Hudood Laws are not necessarily required to be changed only controversial parts can be changed to meet with the injunctions of Islam.

3.       Usually victim of Zina-bil-Jabr complaints for victimization. Her statements must be given weightage, because it is almost impossible that consenting party can go to Court. If third party complaints of Zina that party must provide proof according to Islamic principles of testimony. Law should facilitate a woman to approach immediately soon after the offence is committed to show her innocence. D.N.A test of accused rapist will be helpful to prove offence.

4.       For the case to be tried under Tazeer, four witnesses are not required and punishments can still be given if offence falls with in the purview of Tazir. A person guilty of Qazf is liable to be punished with 30 lashes and his/her evidence will never be accepted in Court of law. He/she is, in the words of Allah, a 'transgressor" This is area which can be improved and changed in the Hudood Ordinance. The changed version will lead to fewer false accusations of Zina.

5.       Clear distinction may be made with regard to the punishment of Zina and Zina-bil-jabr and circumstantial evidence may be admitted for the punishment in Hudood cases. Overall this ordinance has proved harmful for the women therefore one must review this after consulting Jurists and religious scholars. The Purpose and objectives to be achieved is that the people may not indulge in crime because of fear of Allah. The crime under the circumstances is punishable in this world and since it is a sin also, it is punishable in this world in the world here after.

6.       Women belonging to minorities are also affected due to these laws. For non Muslims legislation should be done according to their own religious point of view if both parties are non Muslims.

7.       Women rehabilitations and conciliation centers must be established for those victums who are refused by blood relations and society.

8.       Medical testimony, which establishes that sexual intercourse has taken place, can be used as proof against women if she is unable to provide victim that she did not consented to the act.

9.       Role of media cannot be ignored. It should play effective and positive role to eliminate social evils in the society.

10.     Social legislations will be helpful to realize evil practices.

CONCLUSION

Society is very sensitive with regard to woman folk. Social acceptance is a big issue whether she is acquitted or convicted. There is deterrence on the part of women to go to thana (police station), because they think that could not get profit out of it. Justice has become expensive. A victim has to suffer a lot due to expenses besides other hardships. Honour of family is attached with the honour of women. So instead of getting justice relatives of victim avoid to go to the Court they think that in this way they will be more dishonored. This factor encourages rapists more.

“The current ratio of conviction tells the whole story as to how many women have been sentenced under Hadood Law. It is police power which needs to bridled, not huge laws on a wholes code basis, thus wasting the nations time and money".[86]

Women in Pakistan are still unprotected.only promulgation of ordinance is not necessary for change unless practical steps with reformative point of view are not taken.

Domestic violence is also concerned with women protection. But there is not effective legislation on it.

Past government has accepted the short comings of the Hudood laws but has refrained from doing practical steps. The big question is who has the right to legislate in an Islamic State? People or executive but one thing must be assured that all laws must have the peoples will, as a sanction behind them. This means that only a Parliament elected by the people has the right to make laws. In any country, laws arc meant to confirm to society's needs and conditions carefully.

There is always a need of Ijtihad to meet the requirements. This law was promulgated on the will of a President. There was no consensus of opinions of Ulmas. So this Islamic Penal Law required Ijtihad at time and also today.

In the case of Qazf the punishment is severe. The contention that this punishment was only awarded to those who accepted their guilt and asked for atonement is the sublime essence of Islamic Justice. The Holy Prophet (SAW) and the Khulfa-i- Rashideen were most reluctant to award this punishment unless proved beyond a shadow of doubt, which was only possible when the person voluntarily admitted and asked for atonement. The conditions for the charge sheet and qualifications of witnesses are so stringent that it is next to impossible to convict anyone. If charge is proved to be false or frivolous, the accuser risks to be flogged himself and his testimony never to be trusted again. If the accused is insane or intoxicated he gets the benefits of doubt with so many things going in favour of accused and the onus of proof being on the accuser, a good lawyer with through knowledge of Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence and not fear Hadood Ordinance. Severe punishments prescribed in Islam are only to instill the fear of Allah and are determents. To day Islam exist only in name, appearance and some ritual. Hadood ordinance can only tarnish the image of Islam.

In the end it can be concluded that there can be no contention upon the Hadd but Tazzir can be modified and procedure can be amended if other requirements are fulfilled.

Apart from the legal aspect, there is a social aspect that also needs to be addressed, for laws alone cannot bring about the much needed change in attitude. It will be a positive development if enlightened members of a community come out to voice opinion on crimes against women. Such an initiative must be matched by an on-going dialogue aimed at creating awareness on these ends and with other important problems.

PERSONAL INJURY AND LIABILITY OF A CARRIER

ARTICLE 17 WARSAW CONVENTION - PERSONAL INJURY - AIRLINE PASSENGERS - INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE BY AIR

By: Aga Zaheer Ahmed

Barrister-at-Law

Introduction:

In Pakistan Warsaw Convention as amended at Hague in 1955 came into force through the ratifying act of Carriage by Air (International Convention) Act, 1966[87]. Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention imposes strict liability[88] on carrier if a passenger sustains personal injury[89] as to:

I.                    Death,

II.                 Wounding, or;

III.               Any other bodily injury

In recent years many issues have arisen regarding Article 17 in Convention Countries such as Pakistan[90], UK[91], USA[92], Israel[93] and Australia[94]. Principal questions at issue are: 

1.              Whether Convention provides exclusive cause of action and remedy?

2.              What amounts to an accident within the meaning of Art.17?

3.              Whether bodily injury encompasses conditions such as mild post turmeric stress or depression in the absence of physical harm?

4.              When does convention apply? What is meant by ‘in the course of embarking within the meaning of section 17?

1.                  Whether Convention provides exclusive cause of action and remedy?

The main significance of the Sidhu case[95] was confirmation by the House of Lords that Art.17 provided the sole avenue of redress for injured passengers. Passengers on a British Airways flight brought proceedings in England and Scotland. The flight was destine to Malaysia from London, the plane landed in Kuwait for refuelling on August 1, 1990, several hours after Iraqi forces, had begun to invade Kuwait, the event which provoked the First Gulf War. The passengers were in the airport terminal when Iraqi forces attacked the airport, took them prisoner and removed them to Baghdad. They were not released until several weeks later. In the proceeding against the airline, they claimed damages at common law for personal injury, loss and damage including loss of their baggage. They contended that the airline was negligent in causing or permitting the aircraft to fly into a war zone when they knew or ought to have known of the imminence of the conflict and that the passengers would or might be taken captive and ill-treated. The claimants accepted that the Warsaw Convention applies. The main question before the House was whether the Convention provided the exclusive cause of action and remedy. It was also common ground between the parties that provisions of art. 17 did not give the claimants any claim under the Convention, but that if it had done so there would have been no claim at common law. Thus, Lord Hope defined the question before the House in this way:

               “So the stark issue which is before us in this appeal is whether a passenger who has sustained damage in the course of international carriage by air due to the fault of the carrier, but who has no claim against the carrier under Article 17 of the Convention is left without a remedy”

It was accepted that they were still in the course of international carriage by air. Although the passengers were in the terminal when they were arrested they were still in transit to their ultimate destination. Lord Hope of Craighead, in Sidhu[96] discussed at some length the approach to be adopted in the construction of the Convention. The judgement was concurred in by the other Law Lords. Using golden/purposive rule his Lordship emphasised that the focus should be on the Convention itself, rather than the Carriage by Air Act 1961, which implemented it. The legislative history and travaux préparatoires[97] may be considered to resolve ambiguities or obscurities, when the material is publicly available and points to a definite consensus among delegates[98]. Case law from the United Kingdom and elsewhere was relevant, although the value of foreign court decisions would be reduced if the decisions conflicted or disclosed no clear line of approach.

Lord Hope concluded that the Convention provided the sole remedy available to the appellants, to the exclusion of domestic law. Although at first sight it might not seem just to deprive the parties of other remedies normally available to them, Lord Hope justified his conclusion as follows:

            "I believe that the answer to the question raised in the present case is to be found in the objects and structure of the Convention. The language used and the subject-matter with which it deals demonstrate that what was sought to be achieved was a uniform international code, which could be applied by the courts of all the high contracting parties without reference to the rules of their own domestic law. The Convention does not purport to deal with all matters relating to contracts of international carriage by air. But in those areas with which it deals--and the liability of the carrier is one of them--the code is intended to be uniform and to be exclusive also of any resort to the rules of domestic law.

An answer to the question, which leaves claimants without a remedy, is not at first sight attractive. It is tempting to give way to the argument that where there is a wrong there must be a remedy. That indeed is the foundation upon which much of our own common law has been built up. The broad principles, which provide the foundation for the law of delict in Scotland and of torts in the English common law, have been developed upon these lines. No system of law can attempt to compensate persons for all losses in whatever circumstances. However, the assumption is that, where a breach of duty has caused loss, a remedy in damages ought to be available.

Alongside these principles, however, there lies another great principle, which is that of freedom of contract. Any person is free, unless restrained by statute, to enter into a contract with another on the basis that his liability in damages is excluded or limited if he is in breach of contract. Exclusion and limitation clauses are a common feature of commercial contracts, and contracts of carriage are no exception. It is against that background, rather than a desire to provide remedies to enable all losses to be compensated, that the Convention must be judged. It was not designed to provide remedies against the carrier to enable all losses to be compensated. It was designed instead to define those situations in which compensation was to be available. So it set out the limits of liability and the conditions under which claims to establish that liability, if disputed, were to be made. A balance was struck, in the interests of certainty and uniformity."

The ruling that the Convention provides the sole remedy, to the exclusion of rights of action derived from domestic law, has also been supported by the US Supreme Court[99].  However in Dr. Prof Haroon v British Airways[100] a different approach was taken by the learned single judge of Sindh High Court:

“From the scheme of the Convention as well as the Act of 1966, it appears that cases of breach of contract of the kind in hand are not contemplated therein. Thus it does not mean that where a wrong done, breach committed or injury inflicted is not within the contemplation of the Convention and the Act of 1966, the carrier is absolved of any liability, aftermath or consequence Applying age old legal maxim "ubi jus ibi remedium" (where there is right[101] there is remedy). As to "statutory wrong" the Convention provides complete code as to rights and liabilities both of the carrier and the passenger However, any wrong, breach or mischief not within the contemplation of the Convention or the Act of 1966, same could be redressed either under law governing contract, in case of Pakistan under the Contract Act. 1872 or general law or even in appropriate cases under Tort

… The convention is silent, as regard liability of air carrier for the breach of contract of carriage. By this, it does not mean that air carrier is rendered absolved of all the liability in cases of breach of contract, occurrence of any wrong ether than "statutory wrong" Such would be anomalous position, there is no wrong without a remedy. Where any injury is caused or loss occurs during the course of or in furtherance of carriage by air that may not be within the contemplation of Convention, a passenger, consignee or any other person will always have a remedy against the carrier. Where statutory liability of air carried under the Convention terminates; realm of general law governing contractual obligation begins or where no remedy under general law of contract is available remedy under tort may be extended provided a case is made out

Justice Mushir Alam placed reliance on the judgment in Pakistan Airlines Corporation v Ali Raza Rizvi[102]  to justify this conclusion. In this case Pakistan Airlines Corporation’s appeal was dismissed on grounds of limitation[103].  No reference was made to the Convention[104] or the Act of 1966[105]. At any rate, in Pakistan Airlines Corporation v Ali Raza Rizvi, the passenger who was on transit at a foreign airport (India) claimed to have suffered mental torture and agony, because of the fault of clerk of the airline who had torn the relevant coupon of ticket and the passenger was left in lurch in another High Contacting State (India). Article 17 of the Convention[106] is applicable when a passenger is on transit[107] and therefore the question of invoking the maxim "ubi jus ibi remedium" did not arise in this case.    

2.                  What amounts to an accident within the meaning of Art.17?

In a group action in re Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation[108], airline passengers brought claims against a number of international air carriers. They alleged injury and in some instances death following the onset of deep vein thrombosis ("DVT") caused by air travel.

The House of Lords considered the Meaning of the word “accident” used in Article 17:

The use in article 17 of the term "accident" is to be contrasted with the choice of a different term in article 18. Article 18 imposes liability on carriers for damage to baggage or cargo. The use of the term "accident" in article 17 but the term "occurrence" in article 18 must be significant. Both terms impart the idea that something or other has happened. However "occurrence" is entirely general in its natural meaning. It permits no distinction to be drawn between different types of happening. "Accident" on the other hand must have been intended to denote an occurrence of a particular quality, an occurrence having particular characteristics. In the many decided cases in which the issue was whether the occurrence in question constituted an "accident" for article 17 purposes, the judges have had to ask themselves whether the occurrence possessed the necessary quality or characteristics to qualify as an "accident". It is evident that it was never, or should never have been, enough for there to have been an occurrence that caused the damage. For article 17 liability the occurrence had to have the characteristics of an "accident".

Thus it was concluded that Art.17, the situation does not fall within any ordinary or extended concept of ‘accident’. An Accident for the purpose of Art.17 requires an unexpected or unusual event or happening that was external to the passenger.

3.                   Whether bodily injury encompasses conditions such as mild post turmeric stress or depression in the absence of physical harm?

In Eastern Airlines Inc v Floyd[109] in 1991, passengers on an aircraft, which lost power and narrowly avoided having to ditch in the ocean, sued the airline for damages for mental distress. The Supreme Court ruled that the Convention had to be construed in the light of the law prevailing in 1929 when it had been originally signed. Since psychiatric injury was not widely recognised by the law at that time, it did not amount to "bodily injury" within the meaning of Art.17, and accordingly there could be no recovery. To the contrary the Israel Supreme Court in Daddon v Air France[110] in 1984, in a case arising out of the 1976 hijacking of an Air France flight to Entebbe, Uganda held that it was possible to take account of changes in civil air transport since 1929 and also of the fact that, under Israel's domestic law, mental damage or defect was recognised as a bodily injury.

In Sidhu[111] the parties accepted that psychological damage did not fall within the scope of "bodily injury". During the course of argument in the House of Lords, it was suggested that "bodily injury" be construed as including psychological damage, especially if supported by medical evidence as to its effects. Lord Hope said that the point did not arise for decision, was not fully argued, and he preferred to express no opinion on it.

The issue did came in an Australia case of Kotsambasis v Singapore Airlines Ltd.[112] The plaintiff, who had been visiting her mother, boarded a flight in Athens which would bring her home to Sydney. Shortly after takeoff, she was leaning forward in her seat when a sudden jolt threw her backwards. Other passengers were screaming because they could see smoke issuing from the starboard engine, which had caught fire, and it was announced that they would be returning to the terminal. The judge accepted evidence that this caused the plaintiff a severe fright, and that she suffered a back injury in the terminal because of having to carry two heavy bags. The plaintiff sued the defendant under Art.17. At first instance, damages were awarded for psychological injuries resulting from the fright, but not for the back injury because it had not been incurred "in the course of embarking or disembarking". On appeal, Meagher and Stein JJ.A., who delivered the two main judgments, agreed, “bodily injury" in Art.17 could not include psychological injury. Meagher J.A. pointed out that, although this term as used in English and Australian legislation had been held to include psychological injury[113], such interpretation could not guide the interpretation of the same phrase as used in an international agreement. As Eastern Airlines Inc v Floyd[114]  had confirmed, the proper approach was to inquire what the term was intended to mean in 1929 when the Convention was entered into. Stein J.A. added that reliance on Daddon v Air France[115], which had reached the opposite conclusion, was misconceived because it had construed the Convention in the light of post-1929 developments.

The recent authorities on the interpretation of the words "bodily injury" in Art.17 are two cases, one Scottish and the other English, the appeals in which were ultimately heard together by the House of Lords[116].

In the first case, King v Bristow Helicopters Ltd[117], a passenger was on board a helicopter, however due to poor weather and failure of engines the helicopter had to make an emergency landing. There was panic on board and the passenger developed posttraumatic stress disorder. Because of the stress, he suffered from a peptic ulcer disease, which developed after the flight.

In the second case Morris v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines[118], a passenger seated next to her physically molested a girl under the age of 16. Consequently, after travel she was diagnosed as suffering from clinical depression amounting to a single episode of a major depressive illness.

In King, citing Floyd[119] their lordships found that compensation could be allowed for a passenger under Article 17 for physical manifestations of a mental injury. A peptic ulcer disorder dissolves the issues and it is not difficult to see that this is a kind of a bodily injury. The requirement of the casual link to the accident was satisfied, as Mr. King was able to show that the disorder was caused by a mental illness, which was itself caused by the accident. Thus in the King case their lordships allowed the appeal.

Conversely, the appeal in the Morris case was not allowed. It was found that damages for mere mental injury caused by air accidents would not be allowed unless it was associated by a physical injury. Thus simple mental injury as suffered by the passenger was held did not amount to bodily injury. The Court found that there was a distinction between physical and mental injury. Physical injury involves damage or adverse change to the structure of the body, whereas mental illness adversely affects the well-being of the mind without any organic change to the body. It was found that impact injuries (referring to bodily injuries, cuts, bruises etc) and physical manifestations of an injury (skin rashes, heart attacks) resulting from emotional distress fell within the scope of ‘bodily injury’. Therefore it was held that recovery for emotional distress was only limited to situations where this distress has a physical manifestation. Recovery could not be given for distress of the accident itself. Here the passenger did not allege any physical injury and therefore it was found that she could not recover under the Convention.

In Montreal Convention on International Carriage by Air, 1999, for liability of carrier on personal injury again the phrase: ‘bodily injury’ is used[120]. By the time of contracting of the new Convention, the phrase “bodily injury” was widely recognized to include serious psychiatric injury[121]. Montreal convention is not yet part of the domestic law of Pakistan and of most of the other High Contracting States. However, after its ratification it will be difficult not to include post turmeric stress in the definition of ‘bodily injury’. However, the general body of case law on Art.17 appears to confirm that due to the special considerations, which led the contracting parties to agree to the terms of the Warsaw Convention, psychiatric injury find no place in the definition of phrase: ‘bodily injury’. 

4.                  When does convention apply? What is meant by in the course of embarking within the meaning of section 17?

By Article 1 of the Warsaw Convention it ‘…applies to all international carriage of persons, baggage or cargo performed by aircraft… ’. International carriage is defined to mean any carriage in which the place of departure and the place of destination are, by reason of agreement between the parties, within the Territories of two High Contracting Parties. The Contract of carriage is contained in or evidenced by the ticket, which incorporates the carrier’s condition of carriage.

“Convention applies as soon as the passenger has presented a valid ticket for travel and the ticket has been accepted and a boarding pass issued. In other words the carriage begins when the passenger has successfully completed the check-in procedure. That is the beginning of contract of carriage”[122]

In Phillips v Air New Zealand[123]  the claimant Dr. Phillips had asked for assistance from the defendant airline in advance of her arrival at Nadi International Airport, Fiji. She was unfit to carry heavy baggage and when she presented herself for check-in, Mr. Temo an employee of Air Terminal Services (Fiji) Ltd. (ATS) (the ground handlers) pushed the wheelchair onto the moving escalator in order to take Dr. Phillips to the departure area by the gates on the first floor. The public lift was out of order. Due to inadvertence Mr. Temo allowed the chair to slip backwards and it bumped down one or two steps before he managed to get the chair under proper control. The claimant sustained injury and claimed damages.

One of the issue for decision was whether the claimant's accident occurred "in the course of any of the operations of embarking" within the meaning of art. 17.

It was said obiter that as to embarkation, to make a prima facie case that a particular claim is within Article 17 it must be established:

            (1)     that the accident to the passenger is related to a specific flight; and

            (2)     that it happened while the latter was actually entering or about to enter the aircraft; or

            (3)     if it happened in the terminal building or otherwise on the airport premises, that the location of the accident is a place where the injured party was obliged to be in the process of embarkation.

While defining embarkation, Morrison J. said:

The processes of embarkation will, I think, include the checking-in; the passage through security and passport control and the "departure routine", that is, going to the gate to be cleared for embarkation and proceeding thereafter to embark. In the most general sense, these activities are required by the airline of its passengers. In a perfect world, one would arrive at an airport or aerodrome, as it was when the Convention was agreed, and go straight on board. The fact that air travel is bedeviled by security checks and waiting time does not alter the gist of what I think the draftsmen of the Convention intended to be covered by art. 17. If a passenger is required to take a particular step or go to a particular place for boarding then he or she is engaged in a process of embarkation. That means, I think, that during the many minutes a passenger spends in the public or private lounges or goes shopping or eats or drinks in restaurants or cafes, he or she could not be said to be in the process of embarkation. At this stage the passenger is waiting, more or less reluctantly. But he or she may have already been through a process of embarkation (e.g. security, boarding card check and passport control) and will inevitably have to go through other such processes, such as going to the gate and getting on the aircraft. The process of embarkation does not have to be a continuous one. In my judgment this makes good sense of the realities of modern air travel. For some of the time a passenger is able to do what he or she wants; for some of the time he or she has to comply with directions and requirements imposed by the carrier. In the light of the Sidhu[124]  decision, I see no reason to give a restrictive interpretation to art. 17.”

In Dr. Haroon v British Airways[125] case, Plaintiff, a professor and vary famous philanthropist was seriously suffering from trigeminal neuralgia, a treatment of which is not available in Pakistan. The plaintiff and his son obtained an appointment in Boston (USA) and in order to proceed abroad obtained return air tickets issued by British Airways. The journey was to be from Karachi to Dubai on Emirate Airlines and from Dubai to London to Boston on British Airways.

The Plaintiff and his son reported at the Check-in counter of Emirates at Quaid-e-Azam International Airport, Karachi on the date of departure for obtaining their boarding cards. There, the counter staff informed that they had no reservations, and later informed them that they could not be accommodated because the seats had not been reconfirmed 72 hours prior to the start of the journey. The plaintiff who was under severe trigeminal pain and his son who was traveling with him made their best to persuade the counter staff for accommodating them, but to no avail.

The Plaintiff alleged that by being refused accommodation and missing his medical appointment, he suffered heavy financial loss and physical and mental agonies, humiliation and defamation.

The Plaintiff was denied boarding when he presented a valid ticket for travel and the ticket was rejected. Since no boarding pass was issued, the case does not fall within the scope of the Convention and as such the Plaintiff was eligible for domestic law remedies. Mushir Alam J. in his judgement came to the same conclusion but on reasoning inconsistent[126] with HL decision in Sidhu[127] 

Correct lines of reasoning, it is submitted, were to consider first whether convention applies to the instant case or not. If yes, it provides the exclusive remedy for the claimant’s accident. If not (as in this case), then remedy can be sought under domestic law.

------------------------

PERSONAL INJURY AND LIABILITY OF A CARRIER

ARTICLE 17 WARSAW CONVENTION - PERSONAL INJURY - AIRLINE PASSENGERS - INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE BY AIR

By: Aga Zaheer Ahmed

Barrister-at-Law

Introduction:

In Pakistan Warsaw Convention as amended at Hague in 1955 came into force through the ratifying act of Carriage by Air (International Convention) Act, 1966[128]. Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention imposes strict liability[129] on carrier if a passenger sustains personal injury[130] as to:

IV.              Death,

V.                 Wounding, or;

VI.              Any other bodily injury

In recent years many issues have arisen regarding Article 17 in Convention Countries such as Pakistan[131], UK[132], USA[133], Israel[134] and Australia[135]. Principal questions at issue are: 

5.              Whether Convention provides exclusive cause of action and remedy?

6.              What amounts to an accident within the meaning of Art.17?

7.              Whether bodily injury encompasses conditions such as mild post turmeric stress or depression in the absence of physical harm?

8.              When does convention apply? What is meant by ‘in the course of embarking within the meaning of section 17?

5.                  Whether Convention provides exclusive cause of action and remedy?

The main significance of the Sidhu case[136] was confirmation by the House of Lords that Art.17 provided the sole avenue of redress for injured passengers. Passengers on a British Airways flight brought proceedings in England and Scotland. The flight was destine to Malaysia from London, the plane landed in Kuwait for refuelling on August 1, 1990, several hours after Iraqi forces, had begun to invade Kuwait, the event which provoked the First Gulf War. The passengers were in the airport terminal when Iraqi forces attacked the airport, took them prisoner and removed them to Baghdad. They were not released until several weeks later. In the proceeding against the airline, they claimed damages at common law for personal injury, loss and damage including loss of their baggage. They contended that the airline was negligent in causing or permitting the aircraft to fly into a war zone when they knew or ought to have known of the imminence of the conflict and that the passengers would or might be taken captive and ill-treated. The claimants accepted that the Warsaw Convention applies. The main question before the House was whether the Convention provided the exclusive cause of action and remedy. It was also common ground between the parties that provisions of art. 17 did not give the claimants any claim under the Convention, but that if it had done so there would have been no claim at common law. Thus, Lord Hope defined the question before the House in this way:

               “So the stark issue which is before us in this appeal is whether a passenger who has sustained damage in the course of international carriage by air due to the fault of the carrier, but who has no claim against the carrier under Article 17 of the Convention is left without a remedy”

It was accepted that they were still in the course of international carriage by air. Although the passengers were in the terminal when they were arrested they were still in transit to their ultimate destination. Lord Hope of Craighead, in Sidhu[137] discussed at some length the approach to be adopted in the construction of the Convention. The judgement was concurred in by the other Law Lords. Using golden/purposive rule his Lordship emphasised that the focus should be on the Convention itself, rather than the Carriage by Air Act 1961, which implemented it. The legislative history and travaux préparatoires[138] may be considered to resolve ambiguities or obscurities, when the material is publicly available and points to a definite consensus among delegates[139]. Case law from the United Kingdom and elsewhere was relevant, although the value of foreign court decisions would be reduced if the decisions conflicted or disclosed no clear line of approach.

Lord Hope concluded that the Convention provided the sole remedy available to the appellants, to the exclusion of domestic law. Although at first sight it might not seem just to deprive the parties of other remedies normally available to them, Lord Hope justified his conclusion as follows:

            "I believe that the answer to the question raised in the present case is to be found in the objects and structure of the Convention. The language used and the subject-matter with which it deals demonstrate that what was sought to be achieved was a uniform international code, which could be applied by the courts of all the high contracting parties without reference to the rules of their own domestic law. The Convention does not purport to deal with all matters relating to contracts of international carriage by air. But in those areas with which it deals--and the liability of the carrier is one of them--the code is intended to be uniform and to be exclusive also of any resort to the rules of domestic law.

An answer to the question, which leaves claimants without a remedy, is not at first sight attractive. It is tempting to give way to the argument that where there is a wrong there must be a remedy. That indeed is the foundation upon which much of our own common law has been built up. The broad principles, which provide the foundation for the law of delict in Scotland and of torts in the English common law, have been developed upon these lines. No system of law can attempt to compensate persons for all losses in whatever circumstances. However, the assumption is that, where a breach of duty has caused loss, a remedy in damages ought to be available.

Alongside these principles, however, there lies another great principle, which is that of freedom of contract. Any person is free, unless restrained by statute, to enter into a contract with another on the basis that his liability in damages is excluded or limited if he is in breach of contract. Exclusion and limitation clauses are a common feature of commercial contracts, and contracts of carriage are no exception. It is against that background, rather than a desire to provide remedies to enable all losses to be compensated, that the Convention must be judged. It was not designed to provide remedies against the carrier to enable all losses to be compensated. It was designed instead to define those situations in which compensation was to be available. So it set out the limits of liability and the conditions under which claims to establish that liability, if disputed, were to be made. A balance was struck, in the interests of certainty and uniformity."

The ruling that the Convention provides the sole remedy, to the exclusion of rights of action derived from domestic law, has also been supported by the US Supreme Court[140].  However in Dr. Prof Haroon v British Airways[141] a different approach was taken by the learned single judge of Sindh High Court:

“From the scheme of the Convention as well as the Act of 1966, it appears that cases of breach of contract of the kind in hand are not contemplated therein. Thus it does not mean that where a wrong done, breach committed or injury inflicted is not within the contemplation of the Convention and the Act of 1966, the carrier is absolved of any liability, aftermath or consequence Applying age old legal maxim "ubi jus ibi remedium" (where there is right[142] there is remedy). As to "statutory wrong" the Convention provides complete code as to rights and liabilities both of the carrier and the passenger However, any wrong, breach or mischief not within the contemplation of the Convention or the Act of 1966, same could be redressed either under law governing contract, in case of Pakistan under the Contract Act. 1872 or general law or even in appropriate cases under Tort

… The convention is silent, as regard liability of air carrier for the breach of contract of carriage. By this, it does not mean that air carrier is rendered absolved of all the liability in cases of breach of contract, occurrence of any wrong ether than "statutory wrong" Such would be anomalous position, there is no wrong without a remedy. Where any injury is caused or loss occurs during the course of or in furtherance of carriage by air that may not be within the contemplation of Convention, a passenger, consignee or any other person will always have a remedy against the carrier. Where statutory liability of air carried under the Convention terminates; realm of general law governing contractual obligation begins or where no remedy under general law of contract is available remedy under tort may be extended provided a case is made out

Justice Mushir Alam placed reliance on the judgment in Pakistan Airlines Corporation v Ali Raza Rizvi[143]  to justify this conclusion. In this case Pakistan Airlines Corporation’s appeal was dismissed on grounds of limitation[144].  No reference was made to the Convention[145] or the Act of 1966[146]. At any rate, in Pakistan Airlines Corporation v Ali Raza Rizvi, the passenger who was on transit at a foreign airport (India) claimed to have suffered mental torture and agony, because of the fault of clerk of the airline who had torn the relevant coupon of ticket and the passenger was left in lurch in another High Contacting State (India). Article 17 of the Convention[147] is applicable when a passenger is on transit[148] and therefore the question of invoking the maxim "ubi jus ibi remedium" did not arise in this case.    

6.                  What amounts to an accident within the meaning of Art.17?

In a group action in re Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation[149], airline passengers brought claims against a number of international air carriers. They alleged injury and in some instances death following the onset of deep vein thrombosis ("DVT") caused by air travel.

The House of Lords considered the Meaning of the word “accident” used in Article 17:

The use in article 17 of the term "accident" is to be contrasted with the choice of a different term in article 18. Article 18 imposes liability on carriers for damage to baggage or cargo. The use of the term "accident" in article 17 but the term "occurrence" in article 18 must be significant. Both terms impart the idea that something or other has happened. However "occurrence" is entirely general in its natural meaning. It permits no distinction to be drawn between different types of happening. "Accident" on the other hand must have been intended to denote an occurrence of a particular quality, an occurrence having particular characteristics. In the many decided cases in which the issue was whether the occurrence in question constituted an "accident" for article 17 purposes, the judges have had to ask themselves whether the occurrence possessed the necessary quality or characteristics to qualify as an "accident". It is evident that it was never, or should never have been, enough for there to have been an occurrence that caused the damage. For article 17 liability the occurrence had to have the characteristics of an "accident".

Thus it was concluded that Art.17, the situation does not fall within any ordinary or extended concept of ‘accident’. An Accident for the purpose of Art.17 requires an unexpected or unusual event or happening that was external to the passenger.

7.                   Whether bodily injury encompasses conditions such as mild post turmeric stress or depression in the absence of physical harm?

In Eastern Airlines Inc v Floyd[150] in 1991, passengers on an aircraft, which lost power and narrowly avoided having to ditch in the ocean, sued the airline for damages for mental distress. The Supreme Court ruled that the Convention had to be construed in the light of the law prevailing in 1929 when it had been originally signed. Since psychiatric injury was not widely recognised by the law at that time, it did not amount to "bodily injury" within the meaning of Art.17, and accordingly there could be no recovery. To the contrary the Israel Supreme Court in Daddon v Air France[151] in 1984, in a case arising out of the 1976 hijacking of an Air France flight to Entebbe, Uganda held that it was possible to take account of changes in civil air transport since 1929 and also of the fact that, under Israel's domestic law, mental damage or defect was recognised as a bodily injury.

In Sidhu[152] the parties accepted that psychological damage did not fall within the scope of "bodily injury". During the course of argument in the House of Lords, it was suggested that "bodily injury" be construed as including psychological damage, especially if supported by medical evidence as to its effects. Lord Hope said that the point did not arise for decision, was not fully argued, and he preferred to express no opinion on it.

The issue did came in an Australia case of Kotsambasis v Singapore Airlines Ltd.[153] The plaintiff, who had been visiting her mother, boarded a flight in Athens which would bring her home to Sydney. Shortly after takeoff, she was leaning forward in her seat when a sudden jolt threw her backwards. Other passengers were screaming because they could see smoke issuing from the starboard engine, which had caught fire, and it was announced that they would be returning to the terminal. The judge accepted evidence that this caused the plaintiff a severe fright, and that she suffered a back injury in the terminal because of having to carry two heavy bags. The plaintiff sued the defendant under Art.17. At first instance, damages were awarded for psychological injuries resulting from the fright, but not for the back injury because it had not been incurred "in the course of embarking or disembarking". On appeal, Meagher and Stein JJ.A., who delivered the two main judgments, agreed, “bodily injury" in Art.17 could not include psychological injury. Meagher J.A. pointed out that, although this term as used in English and Australian legislation had been held to include psychological injury[154], such interpretation could not guide the interpretation of the same phrase as used in an international agreement. As Eastern Airlines Inc v Floyd[155]  had confirmed, the proper approach was to inquire what the term was intended to mean in 1929 when the Convention was entered into. Stein J.A. added that reliance on Daddon v Air France[156], which had reached the opposite conclusion, was misconceived because it had construed the Convention in the light of post-1929 developments.

The recent authorities on the interpretation of the words "bodily injury" in Art.17 are two cases, one Scottish and the other English, the appeals in which were ultimately heard together by the House of Lords[157].

In the first case, King v Bristow Helicopters Ltd[158], a passenger was on board a helicopter, however due to poor weather and failure of engines the helicopter had to make an emergency landing. There was panic on board and the passenger developed posttraumatic stress disorder. Because of the stress, he suffered from a peptic ulcer disease, which developed after the flight.

In the second case Morris v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines[159], a passenger seated next to her physically molested a girl under the age of 16. Consequently, after travel she was diagnosed as suffering from clinical depression amounting to a single episode of a major depressive illness.

In King, citing Floyd[160] their lordships found that compensation could be allowed for a passenger under Article 17 for physical manifestations of a mental injury. A peptic ulcer disorder dissolves the issues and it is not difficult to see that this is a kind of a bodily injury. The requirement of the casual link to the accident was satisfied, as Mr. King was able to show that the disorder was caused by a mental illness, which was itself caused by the accident. Thus in the King case their lordships allowed the appeal.

Conversely, the appeal in the Morris case was not allowed. It was found that damages for mere mental injury caused by air accidents would not be allowed unless it was associated by a physical injury. Thus simple mental injury as suffered by the passenger was held did not amount to bodily injury. The Court found that there was a distinction between physical and mental injury. Physical injury involves damage or adverse change to the structure of the body, whereas mental illness adversely affects the well-being of the mind without any organic change to the body. It was found that impact injuries (referring to bodily injuries, cuts, bruises etc) and physical manifestations of an injury (skin rashes, heart attacks) resulting from emotional distress fell within the scope of ‘bodily injury’. Therefore it was held that recovery for emotional distress was only limited to situations where this distress has a physical manifestation. Recovery could not be given for distress of the accident itself. Here the passenger did not allege any physical injury and therefore it was found that she could not recover under the Convention.

In Montreal Convention on International Carriage by Air, 1999, for liability of carrier on personal injury again the phrase: ‘bodily injury’ is used[161]. By the time of contracting of the new Convention, the phrase “bodily injury” was widely recognized to include serious psychiatric injury[162]. Montreal convention is not yet part of the domestic law of Pakistan and of most of the other High Contracting States. However, after its ratification it will be difficult not to include post turmeric stress in the definition of ‘bodily injury’. However, the general body of case law on Art.17 appears to confirm that due to the special considerations, which led the contracting parties to agree to the terms of the Warsaw Convention, psychiatric injury find no place in the definition of phrase: ‘bodily injury’. 

8.                  When does convention apply? What is meant by in the course of embarking within the meaning of section 17?

By Article 1 of the Warsaw Convention it ‘…applies to all international carriage of persons, baggage or cargo performed by aircraft… ’. International carriage is defined to mean any carriage in which the place of departure and the place of destination are, by reason of agreement between the parties, within the Territories of two High Contracting Parties. The Contract of carriage is contained in or evidenced by the ticket, which incorporates the carrier’s condition of carriage.

“Convention applies as soon as the passenger has presented a valid ticket for travel and the ticket has been accepted and a boarding pass issued. In other words the carriage begins when the passenger has successfully completed the check-in procedure. That is the beginning of contract of carriage”[163]

In Phillips v Air New Zealand[164]  the claimant Dr. Phillips had asked for assistance from the defendant airline in advance of her arrival at Nadi International Airport, Fiji. She was unfit to carry heavy baggage and when she presented herself for check-in, Mr. Temo an employee of Air Terminal Services (Fiji) Ltd. (ATS) (the ground handlers) pushed the wheelchair onto the moving escalator in order to take Dr. Phillips to the departure area by the gates on the first floor. The public lift was out of order. Due to inadvertence Mr. Temo allowed the chair to slip backwards and it bumped down one or two steps before he managed to get the chair under proper control. The claimant sustained injury and claimed damages.

One of the issue for decision was whether the claimant's accident occurred "in the course of any of the operations of embarking" within the meaning of art. 17.

It was said obiter that as to embarkation, to make a prima facie case that a particular claim is within Article 17 it must be established:

            (1)     that the accident to the passenger is related to a specific flight; and

            (2)     that it happened while the latter was actually entering or about to enter the aircraft; or

            (3)     if it happened in the terminal building or otherwise on the airport premises, that the location of the accident is a place where the injured party was obliged to be in the process of embarkation.

While defining embarkation, Morrison J. said:

The processes of embarkation will, I think, include the checking-in; the passage through security and passport control and the "departure routine", that is, going to the gate to be cleared for embarkation and proceeding thereafter to embark. In the most general sense, these activities are required by the airline of its passengers. In a perfect world, one would arrive at an airport or aerodrome, as it was when the Convention was agreed, and go straight on board. The fact that air travel is bedeviled by security checks and waiting time does not alter the gist of what I think the draftsmen of the Convention intended to be covered by art. 17. If a passenger is required to take a particular step or go to a particular place for boarding then he or she is engaged in a process of embarkation. That means, I think, that during the many minutes a passenger spends in the public or private lounges or goes shopping or eats or drinks in restaurants or cafes, he or she could not be said to be in the process of embarkation. At this stage the passenger is waiting, more or less reluctantly. But he or she may have already been through a process of embarkation (e.g. security, boarding card check and passport control) and will inevitably have to go through other such processes, such as going to the gate and getting on the aircraft. The process of embarkation does not have to be a continuous one. In my judgment this makes good sense of the realities of modern air travel. For some of the time a passenger is able to do what he or she wants; for some of the time he or she has to comply with directions and requirements imposed by the carrier. In the light of the Sidhu[165]  decision, I see no reason to give a restrictive interpretation to art. 17.”

In Dr. Haroon v British Airways[166] case, Plaintiff, a professor and vary famous philanthropist was seriously suffering from trigeminal neuralgia, a treatment of which is not available in Pakistan. The plaintiff and his son obtained an appointment in Boston (USA) and in order to proceed abroad obtained return air tickets issued by British Airways. The journey was to be from Karachi to Dubai on Emirate Airlines and from Dubai to London to Boston on British Airways.

The Plaintiff and his son reported at the Check-in counter of Emirates at Quaid-e-Azam International Airport, Karachi on the date of departure for obtaining their boarding cards. There, the counter staff informed that they had no reservations, and later informed them that they could not be accommodated because the seats had not been reconfirmed 72 hours prior to the start of the journey. The plaintiff who was under severe trigeminal pain and his son who was traveling with him made their best to persuade the counter staff for accommodating them, but to no avail.

The Plaintiff alleged that by being refused accommodation and missing his medical appointment, he suffered heavy financial loss and physical and mental agonies, humiliation and defamation.

The Plaintiff was denied boarding when he presented a valid ticket for travel and the ticket was rejected. Since no boarding pass was issued, the case does not fall within the scope of the Convention and as such the Plaintiff was eligible for domestic law remedies. Mushir Alam J. in his judgement came to the same conclusion but on reasoning inconsistent[167] with HL decision in Sidhu[168] 

Correct lines of reasoning, it is submitted, were to consider first whether convention applies to the instant case or not. If yes, it provides the exclusive remedy for the claimant’s accident. If not (as in this case), then remedy can be sought under domestic law.

------------------------

FLAWS IN PUNJAB RENTED PREMISES ORDINANCE, 2007

By
CH. MUHAMMAD BASHIR
Advocate, Faisalabad.
(Ex. Member Punjab Bar Council).

The said Ordinance, in relation to creation of future tenancies, has made the following Provisions:-

Section 5(1) provides that a Landlord cannot let out a premise to a tenant except by a Tenancy Agreement.

Sub-section (2) obliges a Landlord to present the Tenancy Agreement before Rent Registrar.

Sub-section (3) provides that the Rent Registrar shall enter the particulars of the tenancy in a Registrar, affix his official seal on the tenancy agreement, retain a copy thereof and return original tenancy agreement to the landlord.

Sub-section (4) provides that the entry of particulars of the tenancy shall not absolve the landlord or the Tenant of their liability to register the tenancy agreement under the law relating to registration of documents.

Sub-section (5) provides that the tenancy agreement entered in the office of a Rent Registrar or a certified copy thereof shall be a proof of the relationship of landlord and tenant.

Section 6 provides that tenancy agreement shall contain, as far as possible, the following particulars:-

(a)     particulars of the landlord and the tenant;

(b)     description of the premises;

(c)     period of tenancy;

(d)     rate of rent, rate of enhancement, due date and mode of payment of rent;

(e)     particulars of the bank account of the landlord if the rent is to be paid through a bank.

(f)      the purpose for which the premises is let out; and

(g)     amount of advance rent, security of Pagri, if any,

Section 7 obliges a Tenant to pay rent to the Landlord in the mode and by the date mentioned in the Tenancy Agreement.

In case the date of payment is not mentioned the tenant is obliged to make payment by the 10th of the following month.

In case of mode of payment is not mentioned the rent may be paid through money order or deposit in the Bank Account of the Landlord.

As to the bringing of the existing tenancies in conformity with the above requirements of Tenancy Agreements

Section 8 provides that existing tenancies shall, as soon as possible, but not later than 2 years from the date of coming into force of the Ordinance, be brought in conformity with the Provisions of the Ordinance.

Section 9 provides that, if tenancy does not conform to the Provisions of the Ordinance, the Rent Tribunal shall not entertain an application under the Ordinance--

(a)     on behalf of the Tenant, unless he deposits a fine equivalent to 5% of the annual value of the rent of the premises in the Government Treasury.

(b)     On behalf of the Landlord, unless he deposits a fine equivalent to 10% of the annual value of the rent of the premises in the Government Treasury.

The said lay out of the Provisions brings out the following flaws in the Ordinance.

(1)        It Lacks positivity and command.

The accumulative effect of Provisions contained in Sections 5 to 7, on the one hand, is that after the coming into force of the Ordinance no tenancy can be created except by means of Agreement, providing for the particulars specified in Section 6, which apart from being registered under the Registration Act 1908, will be entered in the office of Rent Registrar, while, on the other, it permits the tenancies, not clothed in tenancy Agreement under said Ordinance, to continue to exist or operate, by accommodating them as a basis for making of applications before Rent Tribunal, on payment of fine at the rate of 5% of annual rental value in case the application is filed by tenant, and 10%, in case Landlord files application. So this Ordinance has provided a self-defeating loophole. In this way the said law lacks the essential perquisite of positiveness and command of a good law.

(2)        It does not provide a definite and certain base for determination of annual rental value for levying fine under Section 9.

In case the tenancy is oral and the applications on behalf of Tenant and Landlord are entertainable on payment of respective fines by them and the parties are not agreed on the rate of rent, then the Rent Tribunal, before deciding the application on merits, will be required to find out the actual rate of rent, after reception of evidence, to settle the amount of fine. Such a situation is sure to cause inordinate delay in the disposal of application.

(3)        No mechanism has been provided to squeeze the existing tenancies into tenancy agreements in conformity with the Ordinance.

Section 8 postulates that existing tenancies are to be brought in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance.

There may be more than one reason for not converting the existing tenancies into tenancy agreements under the Ordinance.

FIRSTLY, a dispute might arise as to what are terms of the existing tenancy. So long as a finding is not reached on this point, no question of condensing it into an agreement under the Ordinance can arise;

SECONDLY; a tenant will not find it beneficial to limit his tenancy by signing an agreement;

THIRDLY; A Landlord will not like to be exposed to burden of income and property taxes by certifying his income in the shape of agreement;

FOURTHLY; Both the parties will avoid incurring of Registration expenses.

So the existing tenancies are more likely to remain operative in future in spite of elapse of grace period of two years allowed under Section 8.

(4)        No need for entry of tenancy agreements, already registered under the Registration Act 1908, with the Rent Registrar.

When a tenancy, for a period for one year or more, is registered under the Registration Act 1908, it will be sheer overlapping or duplication to require it to be entered in the office of Rent Registrar. A Registered Tenancy also carries with it presumption of genuineness and validity.

---------------------

KHULA: THE GREAT CONTROVERSY

By:
PROF. ZILL-I-ATIF
Director & Head Faculty of Law
GC University Faisalabad
.

The dynamic concept of Khula has touched new heights of controversy through the recently proposed recommendations made by Council of Islamic Ideology in its recent meeting.1 The Council has recommended a law under which it will be mandatory for a husband to divorce his wife within 90 days if she submits a written demand for divorce. This is a remarkable step forward in the dynamics of Khula.

The law in the country was probably moving towards this end but the Council of Islamic Ideology has made a sudden leap forward. 2 This has sent waves throughout the country, plunging the matter into greater controversy the clerics rising in protest and certain sections of civil society applauding in disbelief.

In the statement made by the Council wherein the recommendations were made, the Council reviewed the wife’s right to divorce in the following words.3

“In usual circumstances, it is expected that a

decent husband will not refuse his wife’s request

(for dissolution of marriage) in a situation

where no reasonable possibility of reconciliation

exists. However, if the husband does not accept

the request, what is the woman to do? The shariah

does not answer this question; instead, as with

many other matters related to life, it leaves this

matter also to our discretion.”

Such a viewpoint of the Council has invoked criticism that the matter is settled law in Shariah and it does not allow an independent unilateral right of divorce to the wife. Another strain of thought states that the substantial law has been decided by Islamic law while procedural law may have been left to “discretion” or to ijtehad. The Council accepted the position that the prevalent procedure has been for the wife to resort to the courts for final settlement. The Council asks a pertinent question does going to the court enhance the opportunity of reconciliation or secure the sanctity of marriage? If not, then it should be discouraged that marriages end up inside the courts.  The Council states:

“Since the Prophet’s time (PBUH) the procedure

that has been adopted for this purpose is that the

woman then approaches the court. In our times,

this step is often fraught with innumerable difficulties

for the woman. One suggestion to resolve this

problem is that the man be asked to delegate

his authority in divorce to the woman. However,

such demand is again not easy to make in

our society, especially on the occasion

of marriage. Furthermore, such stipulation

also negates the spirit and the wisdom in not

giving a woman the right to divorce her husband.”

The Council believed that sending the woman to the court was tantamount to depriving her of the right to seek dissolution of marriage. It was emphasized that “Khula” was a right that belonged to the wife as “Talaq” was the right that belonged exclusively to the husband. The council then recommended (it being a recommendatory and not a law-enacting body):

“Therefore, in our opinion, a law should be

enacted at the level of the state that, after

a woman’s request for termination of marriage,

if the husband refuses to divorce her in the next

90 days, the marriage shall stand dissolved.”

Khula dissolution of marriage at the instance of the woman has another very important side. That is the return of gifts, benefits, matrimonial rewards in lieu of Khula. The principle of “forfeiture” is integral to the doctrine of khula. The doctrine of Khula has an integral and a reciprocal duty for the woman of forfeiture of gifts and remaining dower. The Council has made the recommendation (controversy to established law?):

“If the husband gives his wife assets and

property and demands them back at the

time of divorce, the wife will have to return

the assets except for dower and maintenance

or else approach a court of law for the resolution

of the conflict (of return of assets/Valuables).”

Here again is an interesting deviation from the established position of law. The wife would clearly be entitled to deferred dower and maintenance.

Now the question is whether Council of Islamic ideology can change the existing law? What is its legal status or the status of its dictates? Council of Islamic Ideology is a Constitutional creation 4 and out of twelve parts of the Constitution of 1973, one whole part, Part IX has been allocated to the creation, functions and powers of the Council and is titled “The Islamic Provisions”. The Council was initially established as Advisory Council of Islamic ideology on August 1, 1962 5 and re-designated as Council of Islamic Ideology in the current Constitution of Pakistan. The object for the establishment of the Council is to bring “all existing laws in conformity with the injunctions of the Holy Quran and Sunnah”.6

The Constitution states that the Council if it deems a law to be a deviation from the primary Injunctions of Islam, shall bring such deviation to light and “recommend” to the President or Governor 7 such measures as would bring the law in conformity with Quran and Sunnah. The Council therefore does not have the power of enactment but only recommendation. It is thus that the federal law ministry has asked the Council to prepare a draft on the basis of these recommendations. The finialised Bill would then be introduced and debated in the Parliament. As the Council is supposed to make its recommendations on the basis of Injunctions of Holy Quran and Sunnah, the Council has relied on Surah Nisa for its expositions.8

The fact that the proposals by the Council of Islamic Ideology still need to be tested by the wisdom of Parliament has inspired the opposing views to contest their case with great vigor.  There are clerics who have claimed this expanded right of divorce for the woman to be outrightly unIslamic. Some have gone a step further and attacked the very existence and the wisdom of the Council itself, claiming its members to be political appointees rather than true Islamic Ulemas.9

Certain sections of the civil society 10 have hailed the decision of the Council. A very intriguing view has been expressed in this regard. It has been contended that a speedier and an expedient implementation of the Council’s decision would be to amend section 18 of the Nikahnama. The section asks the husband whether he is giving his wife the right to divorce. 11 This agreement from the groom is obtained at the time of marriage. Practically, in more than 95 per cent of the cases section 18 of the Nikahnama is struck out at the time of marriage and rendered not applicable. It has been suggested that the application of section 18 be made mandatory. This would save the Parliament from long and laborious debates and controversial legislation.

The right granted under Section 18 of the Nikahnama refers to section 8 of Muslim Family Law Ordinance .12  When invoked, it allows a woman to divorce her husband using section 7 of the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961, which defines the procedure for divorce .13 Significantly, it allows a woman to institute divorce proceedings while retaining her rights over the dower amount, or haq mahr, agreed upon by the contracting parties and recorded on the Nikahnama.

There is a significant difference be